politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why I’ve backed Philip Hammond as next Prime Minister at 33

Socrates said:

FalseFlag said:

Socrates said:

Bob__Sykes said:

Eastwinger said:

So how was Cameron supposed to deny the Scots a vote after the SNP had won an overall majority.

He didn't really have an option.

Let Salmond hold his unofficial illegal referendum he was threatening to hold anyway at some indistinct possible future date, and then with the other Unionist parties simply ignore it if indeed it ever happened?

With polls at the time showing only a third of Scots backed independence, it would have been perfectly sensible to have said "there is no demand for it", and just carried on as normal - ideally, of course, pursuing some policies that were vaguely Scot-friendly.

Instead, he felt the hand of history on his shoulder and thought "I'll lance the SNP boil by forcing them to hold an earlier referendum, on whatever terms Salmond wants, because the Unionist cause will win, and I'll be the PM who saved the Union and put the issue to bed for a generation".

A bold vision. But he's screwed it up magnificently, and even if No somehow gets 50%+1, the genie is out of the bottle now and it is only a matter of time before the wailing Nats get their way now.

All his own doing. He will have to go.

Absurd. Cameron has done things to encourage Scottish independence, but letting the referendum happen wasn't one of them. You can't have a nationalist government in charge of the place and not let them have the vote. It would have caused Scots to be incensed and felt justifiably like a controlled colony. The 'fake' referendum would have won by a large margin and we'd have been in far more bitter constitutional crisis.

Cameron should have allowed a moderate devoplus on the ballot, and made sure Scots in EWNI could vote. No way Salmond would have won.

Sorry, why does this principle not apply to Crimea and Donbass then?

Because these places were invaded by a foreign army.

There was no Ukrainian Army in Crimea during the vote, although there was in 1995 when it was forcibly reincorporated into Ukraine.

MaxPB said:

That was when Hammond was having his career wrecked by Osborne imposibg massive Defence cuts on him.

Why didnt Osborne put the money saved from abandoning HS2 into defence?!

Socrates said:

FalseFlag said:

Socrates said:

Bob__Sykes said:

Eastwinger said:

So how was Cameron supposed to deny the Scots a vote after the SNP had won an overall majority.

He didn't really have an option.

Let Salmond hold his unofficial illegal referendum he was threatening to hold anyway at some indistinct possible future date, and then with the other Unionist parties simply ignore it if indeed it ever happened?

With polls at the time showing only a third of Scots backed independence, it would have been perfectly sensible to have said "there is no demand for it", and just carried on as normal - ideally, of course, pursuing some policies that were vaguely Scot-friendly.

Instead, he felt the hand of history on his shoulder and thought "I'll lance the SNP boil by forcing them to hold an earlier referendum, on whatever terms Salmond wants, because the Unionist cause will win, and I'll be the PM who saved the Union and put the issue to bed for a generation".

A bold vision. But he's screwed it up magnificently, and even if No somehow gets 50%+1, the genie is out of the bottle now and it is only a matter of time before the wailing Nats get their way now.

All his own doing. He will have to go.

Absurd. Cameron has done things to encourage Scottish independence, but letting the referendum happen wasn't one of them. You can't have a nationalist government in charge of the place and not let them have the vote. It would have caused Scots to be incensed and felt justifiably like a controlled colony. The 'fake' referendum would have won by a large margin and we'd have been in far more bitter constitutional crisis.

Cameron should have allowed a moderate devoplus on the ballot, and made sure Scots in EWNI could vote. No way Salmond would have won.

Sorry, why does this principle not apply to Crimea and Donbass then?

Because these places were invaded by a foreign army.

Still you maintain that people should be free to determine their own future, consistency from now on please.

__Bobajob__ said:

Has anyone considered the wild prospect that a Free Scotland might actually be better off, due to a can-do spirit born of creating a new nation?

Like England when we leave the EU?!

__Bobajob__ said:

Has anyone considered the wild prospect that a Free Scotland might actually be better off, due to a can-do spirit born of creating a new nation?

For certain people that would be the worst possible outcome.

JonnyJimmy said:

__Bobajob__ said:

@SeanT

As usual you are confusing what you and your fellow travellers want with the wider public. Two very different things, as ever. Most people will, I dare say, want an amicable divorce that maintains the intercourse if not the marriage between the two nations to maximum benefit.

"As usual"? But.. But.. You're a newb aren't you? Only 3 posts?

Wait a minute, you haven't been here for years, using lots of different names, have you?

Yes he has inc last night

Neil said:

MaxPB said:

That was when Hammond was having his career wrecked by Osborne imposibg massive Defence cuts on him.

Why didnt Osborne put the money saved from abandoning HS2 into defence?!

he's saved it for de fence that will seperate England and Scotland

Alanbrooke said:

__Bobajob__ said:

Has anyone considered the wild prospect that a Free Scotland might actually be better off, due to a can-do spirit born of creating a new nation?

Welcome back BAJ.

In see you've been watching Disney movies in your absence.

As opposed to his previous viewing, which was clearly Star Wars....

@JohnRentoul: Why Scottish independence is a bad idea, in a Venn diagram @FlipChartRick http://t.co/e01mxRbmSw http://t.co/phQPGXhwCN

Neil said:

MaxPB said:

That was when Hammond was having his career wrecked by Osborne imposibg massive Defence cuts on him.

Why didnt Osborne put the money saved from abandoning HS2 into defence?!

Well at least we needn't bother extending the HS2 project any further north if Yes wins (apologies to Geordies).

TheScreamingEagles said:

anothernick said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

anothernick said:

But would the Lib Dems accept Hammond or May (or anyone else) as PM? Or would they see the chaos as a good opportunity to distance themselves from the Tories and demand a vote of confidence? A yes vote could easily result in an Autumn General Election IMO.

The Lib Dems would not trigger an early election when they are polling single digits.

Would be the greatest strategic blunder since Japan attacked Pearl Harbour to keep America OUT of the Second World War.

But what hope have they got of being out of single digits by the Spring? They need to do something drastic to make people sit up and take notice and try to win back some of the left-leaning supported they have lost. How could anyone have confidence in a government that had presided over the loss of a large part of its own country?

The 2015 Budget has potential to boost both coalition parties.

A very small straw indeed.

Losing Scotland - if it happens - will transcend everything else - Cameron will be reviled as the worst PM of the modern era and the government will be dead in the water.

Norm said:

Neil said:

MaxPB said:

That was when Hammond was having his career wrecked by Osborne imposibg massive Defence cuts on him.

Why didnt Osborne put the money saved from abandoning HS2 into defence?!

Well at least we needn't bother extending the HS2 project any further north if Yes wins (apologies to Geordies).

Luvvies will still want to get to Edinburgh in August after independence.

MarqueeMark said:

Alanbrooke said:

__Bobajob__ said:

Has anyone considered the wild prospect that a Free Scotland might actually be better off, due to a can-do spirit born of creating a new nation?

Welcome back BAJ.

In see you've been watching Disney movies in your absence.

As opposed to his previous viewing, which was clearly Star Wars....

"You're far too trusting! Orkney and Shetland is too remote to provide an effective demonstration, but don't worry: we will deal with your Rebel friends soon enough!"

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Neil said:

__Bobajob__ said:

@Sunil
Well there has never been a sporting union outside the bizarre anomaly of the GB Olympic team

Except for in all those sports where there is. But never mind.

But our three most popular team sports definitely are separate - Footy, Rugby and Cricket!

Is cricket really in the top three most popular team sports in Scotland?

Neil said:

Norm said:

Neil said:

MaxPB said:

That was when Hammond was having his career wrecked by Osborne imposibg massive Defence cuts on him.

Why didnt Osborne put the money saved from abandoning HS2 into defence?!

Well at least we needn't bother extending the HS2 project any further north if Yes wins (apologies to Geordies).

Luvvies will still want to get to Edinburgh in August after independence.

it will serve them right for having championed it!

CarlottaVance said:

Neil said:

Norm said:

Neil said:

MaxPB said:

That was when Hammond was having his career wrecked by Osborne imposibg massive Defence cuts on him.

Why didnt Osborne put the money saved from abandoning HS2 into defence?!

Well at least we needn't bother extending the HS2 project any further north if Yes wins (apologies to Geordies).

Luvvies will still want to get to Edinburgh in August after independence.

it will serve them right for having championed it!

I think that's going to be one of the funnier bits, the artist in IScotland will suddenly find 92% of their audience has gone and its hard work to get their attention back.

SeanT said:

Neil said:

MaxPB said:

That was when Hammond was having his career wrecked by Osborne imposibg massive Defence cuts on him.

Why didnt Osborne put the money saved from abandoning HS2 into defence?!

This is actually an interesting issue. As soon as Scotland goes, if it goes, the UK's GDP will shrink by about 8%, meaning there is simply less money to spend, thanks to a smaller tax base (and less room for borrowing).

Projects we are considering now might easily appear unaffordable with a shrunken budget, and that nasty deficit still in place. HS2 is the first and most obvious candidate to go - already very controversial, unwanted by many, etc.

What else?

And of course this applies to Scotland. Stuff the British and Scots governments are planning to do in Scotland will get shelved, as well.

Salmond really is selling the Scots a pup. But if they are happy to buy a pup - or they know he is lying but want indy anyway - fair enough. But what if most of them acvually believe his lies. And then they realise he is lying.

I guess he won't care. But the 45% of Scots who voted NO will be very very angry and bitter.

The BoE will simply print more money as it has done over the last 6 years. Salmond couldn't under Stelingisation.

Neil said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Neil said:

__Bobajob__ said:

@Sunil
Well there has never been a sporting union outside the bizarre anomaly of the GB Olympic team

Except for in all those sports where there is. But never mind.

But our three most popular team sports definitely are separate - Footy, Rugby and Cricket!

Is cricket really in the top three most popular team sports in Scotland?

I did say "our"

SeanT said:

Stuff the British and Scots governments are planning to do in Scotland will get shelved, as well.

What 'stuff' d'ye think that is?

TheScreamingEagles said:

MarqueeMark said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Anorak said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

anothernick said:

But would the Lib Dems accept Hammond or May (or anyone else) as PM? Or would they see the chaos as a good opportunity to distance themselves from the Tories and demand a vote of confidence? A yes vote could easily result in an Autumn General Election IMO.

The Lib Dems would not trigger an early election when they are polling single digits.

Would be the greatest strategic blunder since Japan attacked Pearl Harbour to keep America OUT of the Second World War.

If there'd been one or two more carriers in port, they'd probably have established an Empire over most of the region.

For the want of a nail, etc, etc.

But think of the film we got.

I distinctly HOPE you're thinking of Tora Tora Tora!

Ok two films.

Yes I enjoyed Pearl Harbour, I have a weakness for Michael Bay films

You have a weakness for warmed-over crap???

To be fair to Cameron I don't think he had much choice about a referendum as Salmond said he would hold one anyway and if people voted for independence, it would have been very difficult to stand against it.

Where I think it went wrong was not to offer a devomax choice, with full details provided.

MarkHopkins said:

CarlottaVance said:

Ahem......in the event of Scotland voting to become independent [. ] should remain (net agree) (among VI)
Cameron: +20 (+75)
Miliband : +16 (+30)

Indeed, why should Cameron go because Miliband's Labour has run a bad campaign?

Even if every, single, last, Tory Scottish MP asks for Cameron's head, I cannot see amounting to much...

Because it was his decision to let Labour run the campaign. A Labout party that had lost the last two Scottish elections to the SNP.

rcs1000 said:

Alanbrooke said:

__Bobajob__ said:

Has anyone considered the wild prospect that a Free Scotland might actually be better off, due to a can-do spirit born of creating a new nation?

Welcome back BAJ.

In see you've been watching Disney movies in your absence.

TBF, Ireland has outperformed the UK in the last 20-odd years, going from a substantially lower GDP per capita, to a noticably higher one.

This is not because it's a member of the EU, but because they have adopted pro-business policies, such as a very low corporate rate, and have attracted a lot of manufacturing (particularly in technology and pharmaceuticals), as well as an increasing amount of financial services back office work.

Scotland, in the longer-term, will no follow the Irish model, and I have no doubt that they will prosper as a small-state, pro-business country.

However, between here and there will be a nasty transition period, where a lot of people are disappointed that Scotland is not a socialist nirvana - something that will be compounded by a nasty combination of falling oil prices and falling oil volumes.

it was the 70 years before that which were a bit shit.

And really anyone saying Ireland is boomsville today ought to have relations there. The country is still exporting its people, GDP comparisons are meaningless since it's driven by an over valued currency and it;s only now that Dublin is starting to spring back to life, the rest of the country will be years behind.

Alistair said:

MarkHopkins said:

CarlottaVance said:

Ahem......in the event of Scotland voting to become independent [. ] should remain (net agree) (among VI)
Cameron: +20 (+75)
Miliband : +16 (+30)

Indeed, why should Cameron go because Miliband's Labour has run a bad campaign?

Even if every, single, last, Tory Scottish MP asks for Cameron's head, I cannot see amounting to much...

Because it was his decision to let Labour run the campaign. A Labout party that had lost the last two Scottish elections to the SNP.

And how many Scottish elections have the Tories won in recent decades? Clearly Labour, with forty times more MPs than the Tories, had to make the running on defending the Union. Having Cameron - or any Tory - front the NO campaign would have been about as wise as giving Jimmy S an "Access All Areas" pass to the NHS. With similar results.....

Good afternoon, fellow Britons.

I wonder if it would be more dramatic if No went and won.

I saw a smidgen of a 'debate' between turbanned moron Hardeep Singh Kohli[sp] and a woman I didn't recognise (both Scottish). Kohli asked if it was 51% No and 49% Yes whether the 49% opinion would be taken into account.

The woman said yes, which seemed bonkers to me.

If you lose, you lose. If it's 49% No are the Yes campaign going to take that into consideration?

It's black or white, in or out. Not for a day or a little test phase, on a permanent basis.

Edited extra bit: bah, will soon be out of Diplomacy. My own fault for massively cocking things up. I blame proofreading (which is easily the most tedious and awful part of writing).

MarqueeMark said:

Any word on what proportion of Scots have already voted?

I think the max is (obviously) the 600-650K postal votes out of about 4.2m electors but figures not final and subject to postback/turnout rates obviously. Haven't seen any final counts for postals. However, those who don't send in postals can (I believe) still turn up at polling stations on the day.

Alanbrooke said:

rcs1000 said:

Alanbrooke said:

__Bobajob__ said:

Has anyone considered the wild prospect that a Free Scotland might actually be better off, due to a can-do spirit born of creating a new nation?

Welcome back BAJ.

In see you've been watching Disney movies in your absence.

TBF, Ireland has outperformed the UK in the last 20-odd years, going from a substantially lower GDP per capita, to a noticably higher one.

This is not because it's a member of the EU, but because they have adopted pro-business policies, such as a very low corporate rate, and have attracted a lot of manufacturing (particularly in technology and pharmaceuticals), as well as an increasing amount of financial services back office work.

Scotland, in the longer-term, will no follow the Irish model, and I have no doubt that they will prosper as a small-state, pro-business country.

However, between here and there will be a nasty transition period, where a lot of people are disappointed that Scotland is not a socialist nirvana - something that will be compounded by a nasty combination of falling oil prices and falling oil volumes.

it was the 70 years before that which were a bit shit.

But we were happy. And most of the rest of the UK was also happy. See? It doesnt have to be a disaster. I dont recommend a trade war though. NOT a good idea.

Carnyx said:

Eh?? The Festival, or rather Festivals, are mostly/wholly funded by Edinburgh Council, the Scottish Gmt and what used to be called the Scottish Arts Council AFAIK.

The Tattoo is funded sponsored by RBS UK taxpayers

The fireworks are sponsored by Virgin Money, who announced funding for the next 3 years before knowing 92% of their customer base might leave

Neil said:

Alanbrooke said:

rcs1000 said:

Alanbrooke said:

__Bobajob__ said:

Has anyone considered the wild prospect that a Free Scotland might actually be better off, due to a can-do spirit born of creating a new nation?

Welcome back BAJ.

In see you've been watching Disney movies in your absence.

TBF, Ireland has outperformed the UK in the last 20-odd years, going from a substantially lower GDP per capita, to a noticably higher one.

This is not because it's a member of the EU, but because they have adopted pro-business policies, such as a very low corporate rate, and have attracted a lot of manufacturing (particularly in technology and pharmaceuticals), as well as an increasing amount of financial services back office work.

Scotland, in the longer-term, will no follow the Irish model, and I have no doubt that they will prosper as a small-state, pro-business country.

However, between here and there will be a nasty transition period, where a lot of people are disappointed that Scotland is not a socialist nirvana - something that will be compounded by a nasty combination of falling oil prices and falling oil volumes.

it was the 70 years before that which were a bit shit.

But we were happy. And most of the rest of the UK was also happy. See? It doesnt have to be a disaster. I dont recommend a trade war though. NOT a good idea.

Is that from experience ? I seem to remember Dev started the last one.

As for trade war, who can say, UK voters will expect their govt to look after their interests, business is business. Since you're a pensions man can you really see the population of the UK leaving their pensions in iScotland ? Mine will move if it's a yes vote, assuming of course I can get through a telephone number with 55 million others in the queue.

SeanT

Damn right. Why on earth would an England that had just been told to fuc< off be obliged to prop up a Scottish car carsh? The journey for Scotland from today to freedom and jam is V shaped. A very very deep and calamitous V.

Carnyx said:

Interesting point. The Tattoo isn't formally part of the Arts Festivals, which is what we were discussing. However, it is, of course, concurrent, and in a sense a contribution. Though (quite separately, and no pun intended there) I have been increasingly wondering how much longer MoD could justify it

The MoD couldn't justify a Military display in a foreign country.

SeanT said:

I disagree with the conclusion. Even if it is logical for the FUK to rescue iScotland I reckon it would be politically impossible, especially as we'd be having our own problems - and the voters would turn to UKIP, or whoever, at the very next opportunity.

The Scots might have some oil they could put up as collateral, though.

Carnyx said:

Scott_P said:

Carnyx said:

Eh?? The Festival, or rather Festivals, are mostly/wholly funded by Edinburgh Council, the Scottish Gmt and what used to be called the Scottish Arts Council AFAIK.

The Tattoo is funded sponsored by RBS UK taxpayers

The fireworks are sponsored by Virgin Money, who announced funding for the next 3 years before knowing 92% of their customer base might leave

Interesting point. The Tattoo isn't formally part of the Arts Festivals, which is what we were discussing. However, it is, of course, concurrent, and in a sense a contribution. Though (quite separately, and no pun intended there) I have been increasingly wondering how much longer MoD could justify it, and for that matter the Red Arrows, given the drawdown, and the abolition of so many Scots regiments.

but if you get people like Marcus Brigstock at the festival how do you know we'll let them back in ?

anothernick said:

But Captain Cameron was on the bridge when the ship went down. He will have to take the rap, and history will hold him responsible.

It is true that history will remember him, and not fondly, but the Captain of the ship bit is the key. Again.

If the ship flounders, does the Captain remain on board to ensure the safety of the passengers, or does he jump for the first lifeboat leaving Cabin boy Clegg in charge?

Alanbrooke said:

rcs1000 said:

Alanbrooke said:

__Bobajob__ said:

Has anyone considered the wild prospect that a Free Scotland might actually be better off, due to a can-do spirit born of creating a new nation?

Welcome back BAJ.

In see you've been watching Disney movies in your absence.

TBF, Ireland has outperformed the UK in the last 20-odd years, going from a substantially lower GDP per capita, to a noticably higher one.

This is not because it's a member of the EU, but because they have adopted pro-business policies, such as a very low corporate rate, and have attracted a lot of manufacturing (particularly in technology and pharmaceuticals), as well as an increasing amount of financial services back office work.

Scotland, in the longer-term, will no follow the Irish model, and I have no doubt that they will prosper as a small-state, pro-business country.

However, between here and there will be a nasty transition period, where a lot of people are disappointed that Scotland is not a socialist nirvana - something that will be compounded by a nasty combination of falling oil prices and falling oil volumes.

it was the 70 years before that which were a bit shit.

And really anyone saying Ireland is boomsville today ought to have relations there. The country is still exporting its people, GDP comparisons are meaningless since it's driven by an over valued currency and it;s only now that Dublin is starting to spring back to life, the rest of the country will be years behind.

But small countries are always exporting and importing people in a way large countries are not: 40% of Luxembourg graduates work outside the country. That doesn't mean Luxemourg is a disaster zone that's exporting talent, it means that it's a small country and if your speciality is - say - nuclear fusion or analog semiconductor design then you'll be working abroad. The same would inevitably true of Scotland: it would have critical mass in certain parts of technology (software), engineering, and oil & gas; it would probably lose critical mass in most of the bits of financial services where it is currently strong. (It might continue to have CM in asset management, but we'll see...)

Re Ireland: Industrial production last month was +18%, the highest number on record, property prices are rising, the Markit surveys are among the best in the world, and its 'employment optimism' index at +20 is literally the very best in the world. No, unemployment is not back to pre-crisis levels, but it is falling at a rapid rate, and the latest temporary staffing numbers would indicate it will have sub 10% unemployment by early next year, and could be down to 8% by the end of the year.

Scott_P said:

Carnyx said:

Interesting point. The Tattoo isn't formally part of the Arts Festivals, which is what we were discussing. However, it is, of course, concurrent, and in a sense a contribution. Though (quite separately, and no pun intended there) I have been increasingly wondering how much longer MoD could justify it

The MoD couldn't justify a Military display in a foreign country.

Obviously not most of the acts. But as a visiting group ...

Alanbrooke said:

Carnyx said:

Scott_P said:

Carnyx said:

Eh?? The Festival, or rather Festivals, are mostly/wholly funded by Edinburgh Council, the Scottish Gmt and what used to be called the Scottish Arts Council AFAIK.

The Tattoo is funded sponsored by RBS UK taxpayers

The fireworks are sponsored by Virgin Money, who announced funding for the next 3 years before knowing 92% of their customer base might leave

Interesting point. The Tattoo isn't formally part of the Arts Festivals, which is what we were discussing. However, it is, of course, concurrent, and in a sense a contribution. Though (quite separately, and no pun intended there) I have been increasingly wondering how much longer MoD could justify it, and for that matter the Red Arrows, given the drawdown, and the abolition of so many Scots regiments.

but if you get people like Marcus Brigstock at the festival how do you know we'll let them back in ?

Er, never heard of the gent. I had to Wiki him - and even then the relevance escapes me, so if you would ...?

It's often and conveniently forgotten that not only did we contribute some £3.5 billion to the bailout of Ireland in 2010 but we also propped up the ailing Ulster Bank to the tune of some £10 billion. Ulster Bank has, I believe, branches in the Republic of Ireland.

The notion that any Government in London would, out of sheer vindictiveness, tolerate and accept the economic collapse of an independent Scotland is wholly absurd and deep down Salmond knows that and Cameron knows that too.

For all the bluster about dealing harshly with an independent Scotland, the truth is the social, financial and possibly political consequences of the economic collapse of an independent Scotland would be unsustainable.

The corollary is that voting YES next week won't lead to independence. The ballot paper should say:

"From where do you want your economic, taxation and interest rate policies controlled ?"

A) London
Frankfurt