There’s life in the old dog yet – politicalbetting.com

Theuniondivvie said:

Carnyx said:

Anabobazina said:

Regan has been gently sliding in without actually saying or doing much. It’s very possible she could turbocharge or self-destruct her campaign as soon as a journalist talks to her

I was wondering if I was almost the only one who noticed how she'd been ignored. Apart of course for our lunar lagomorph commenting on her fashion and footwear sense. And one of our Tories rather ungentlemanily (?sp) referring to the lady by her now divorced husband's surname.

I think I saw on twitter that the low profile campaign with no interviews given thus far was her decsion, possibly a wise choice when looking at the so far landmine filled week. No word on whether the Indian Council of Scotland or the Muslim Council of the UK have expressed an opinion on her candidacy.

If she’s wise she’ll hang on until noms close on Friday then give a well thought through interview to a Sunday paper

Anabobazina said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Carnyx said:

Anabobazina said:

Regan has been gently sliding in without actually saying or doing much. It’s very possible she could turbocharge or self-destruct her campaign as soon as a journalist talks to her

I was wondering if I was almost the only one who noticed how she'd been ignored. Apart of course for our lunar lagomorph commenting on her fashion and footwear sense. And one of our Tories rather ungentlemanily (?sp) referring to the lady by her now divorced husband's surname.

I think I saw on twitter that the low profile campaign with no interviews given thus far was her decsion, possibly a wise choice when looking at the so far landmine filled week. No word on whether the Indian Council of Scotland or the Muslim Council of the UK have expressed an opinion on her candidacy.

If she’s wise she’ll hang on until noms close on Friday then give a well thought through interview to a Sunday paper

Point of order

Has any politician ever given a well thought through interview?

Anabobazina said:

Carnyx said:

Anabobazina said:

Regan has been gently sliding in without actually saying or doing much. It’s very possible she could turbocharge or self-destruct her campaign as soon as a journalist talks to her

I was wondering if I was almost the only one who noticed how she'd been ignored. Apart of course for our lunar lagomorph commenting on her fashion and footwear sense. And one of our Tories rather ungentlemanily (?sp) referring to the lady by her now divorced husband's surname.

I don’t think she’ll mind at this stage (about being ignored). Let the press have a proper crack at Forbidden and Useless and wait until Friday by which time they will both hopefully be mortally damaged. She has plenty of time to attention-seek once noms have closed and she is completely sure of the identify of her opponents.

As for calling her by her ex-husband’s name: lot of it about from the grisly old twats on PB. See also “Lady Nugee”.

(I did note she’d passed Moon’s hair and fashion test)

Onwards and upwards!

Who is the ex husband?

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Carnyx said:

Anabobazina said:

Regan has been gently sliding in without actually saying or doing much. It’s very possible she could turbocharge or self-destruct her campaign as soon as a journalist talks to her

I was wondering if I was almost the only one who noticed how she'd been ignored. Apart of course for our lunar lagomorph commenting on her fashion and footwear sense. And one of our Tories rather ungentlemanily (?sp) referring to the lady by her now divorced husband's surname.

I think I saw on twitter that the low profile campaign with no interviews given thus far was her decsion, possibly a wise choice when looking at the so far landmine filled week. No word on whether the Indian Council of Scotland or the Muslim Council of the UK have expressed an opinion on her candidacy.

A genuine question

Who do you think will win this contest ?

Unless someone else chucks their hat in the ring or he blows up*, Yousaf.

Edit: *sorry, tasteless phrase considering the Islamophobic abuse chucked his way on a regular basis.

Leon said:

Entire model of Big Bang possibly wrong. No biggie

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/feb/22/universe-breakers-james-webb-telescope-detects-six-ancient-galaxies

Should have looked up that story in The Times.

It's next to this one...

A photographer whose portraits on Instagram were lauded for their quality and depth has admitted that the pictures are fake and were created using an AI tool.

Jos Avery has attracted thousands of followers since October by posting black and white portraits with detailed biographies.

His followers have praised the quality of his work and the uplifting nature of the stories behind them

Carnyx said:

algarkirk said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Eabhal said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Carnyx said:

malcolmg said:

Chelyabinsk said:

malcolmg said:

Taz , the Scottish NI last year was much higher than pensions

You want to be careful, malky - irritability and forgetfulness are symptoms of dementia.

another nasty arsehole , what kind of a creep comes out with stuff like that , GIRUY

I must say your reasoned assessments of the relative merits of the candidates have been pithy and consistent and entirely logical. Nothing wrong with the old brain.

I don't think any of the Scots on here rates Mr Yousaf. Not one?

But maybe we are all old farts on PB.

I have to say the relentless downer on him from PB types who hate the SNP and indy, and have neither a vote in Scotland or in the leadership election is making me warm to him.

I think he would be an excellent choice from the Scons point of view

Yeah, they might break back into the low 20s in polling.
The thought of SCons & SLab bickering over who gets to be distant second fair breaks my heart.

The Scons would be the only party supporting the 100,000 plus North Sea jobs and duelling the A9 plus of course they are pro the union

That's a Harry Potter sequel I wasn't expecting.

Makes sense I suppose - Rowling lives just off the A9 in Aberfeldy.

And of course if Kate Forbes won she would be very much on the same page as the Scons apart from on independence

Parties with one huge and overwhelming constitutional policy, such as the SNP are in a sort of dilemma.

If you drill down on what they want, they want two constitutional things (I hope).
1) Scottish independence in
2) A multi party democracy.

The second means of course that the first aim intends that all shades of democratically accountable opinion, from Jezza to Lee Anderson to JRM will be held and get elected in the new country.

And the more the SNP has views other than independence, especially slightly off the wall ones, the more they look like a faction not a national movement.

Which is why you need the Scotland Liberation Front as well as the Front for the Liberation of Scotland - and possibly The Liberation of Scotland Front too.

And yet FPTP means loss of seats in Westminster and instant rejection by the UK government of the day under any excuse it can grab, as we have seen successively.

Yes, though other rational analyses are available. But can we not have a niche in the highlands and islands for a Wee Frees Liberation Front and Covenant for a Holy and Independent Scotland?

Welsh to play on Saturday

Gardenwalker said:

YBarddCwsc said:

algarkirk said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Eabhal said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Carnyx said:

malcolmg said:

Chelyabinsk said:

malcolmg said:

Taz , the Scottish NI last year was much higher than pensions

You want to be careful, malky - irritability and forgetfulness are symptoms of dementia.

another nasty arsehole , what kind of a creep comes out with stuff like that , GIRUY

I must say your reasoned assessments of the relative merits of the candidates have been pithy and consistent and entirely logical. Nothing wrong with the old brain.

I don't think any of the Scots on here rates Mr Yousaf. Not one?

But maybe we are all old farts on PB.

I have to say the relentless downer on him from PB types who hate the SNP and indy, and have neither a vote in Scotland or in the leadership election is making me warm to him.

I think he would be an excellent choice from the Scons point of view

Yeah, they might break back into the low 20s in polling.
The thought of SCons & SLab bickering over who gets to be distant second fair breaks my heart.

The Scons would be the only party supporting the 100,000 plus North Sea jobs and duelling the A9 plus of course they are pro the union

That's a Harry Potter sequel I wasn't expecting.

Makes sense I suppose - Rowling lives just off the A9 in Aberfeldy.

And of course if Kate Forbes won she would be very much on the same page as the Scons apart from on independence

Parties with one huge and overwhelming constitutional policy, such as the SNP are in a sort of dilemma.

If you drill down on what they want, they want two constitutional things (I hope).
1) Scottish independence in
2) A multi party democracy.

The second means of course that the first aim intends that all shades of democratically accountable opinion, from Jezza to Lee Anderson to JRM will be held and get elected in the new country.

And the more the SNP has views other than independence, especially slightly off the wall ones, the more they look like a faction not a national movement.

Which is why you need the Scotland Liberation Front as well as the Front for the Liberation of Scotland - and possibly The Liberation of Scotland Front too.

This is just Spiking Separatist Movements 101.

Canada has a clever one.

By ensuring that all Government documents must be bilingual in French & English, they created a large number of Francophones whose livelihoods depend on translating documents from English into French (or vice versa). Much (if not all) of the translation is redundant.

An independent Quebec would be Francophone and have no need of an army of translators. Nor would Anglophone rump Canada need so many translators.

Hence, the Canadian Government created French speakers with a vested interest in saying 'Non' to an independent Quebec.

Certainly enough to have changed the result of the last referendum.

Not entirely sure this specific theory holds water, although the broader point is surely right.

The UK has made no attempt I can see to persuade the Scottish (or Welsh) bureaucratic elite to maintain the Union.

This elite tend not be especially business savvy, and have not yet realised, in Scotland’s case, that independence means the end of the its Financial Services industry (just as Brexit obviously implied the slow collapse, or continued collapse if you like, of British manufacturing).

Yes. See this fascinating FT article (££) on the sad decline of Barcelona. The city not the club

Much of it is the usual. Crime, grime, Airbnb, illegal immigration, WFH, covid - but there’s an added element. Loads of major firms - even Catalan banks - have shifted HQs, offices and jobs to relatively booming Madrid

Why? Just the threat of Catalan independence. Too destabilising. Edinburgh would be destroyed by
Indy

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Re the election of the next FM will there be public televised hustings?

This depends on who the candidates are and what they can agree, but I believe all announced candidates have told the BBC and STV that they are keen on televised hustings so it looks likely although details TBC.

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Re the election of the next FM will there be public televised hustings?

This depends on who the candidates are and what they can agree, but I believe all announced candidates have told the BBC and STV that they are keen on televised hustings so it looks likely although details TBC.

Thanks

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons. It should have gone to Leeds (already the northern finance hub, to the extent one exists).

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

YBarddCwsc said:

Gardenwalker said:

YBarddCwsc said:

algarkirk said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Eabhal said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Carnyx said:

malcolmg said:

Chelyabinsk said:

malcolmg said:

Taz , the Scottish NI last year was much higher than pensions

You want to be careful, malky - irritability and forgetfulness are symptoms of dementia.

another nasty arsehole , what kind of a creep comes out with stuff like that , GIRUY

I must say your reasoned assessments of the relative merits of the candidates have been pithy and consistent and entirely logical. Nothing wrong with the old brain.

I don't think any of the Scots on here rates Mr Yousaf. Not one?

But maybe we are all old farts on PB.

I have to say the relentless downer on him from PB types who hate the SNP and indy, and have neither a vote in Scotland or in the leadership election is making me warm to him.

I think he would be an excellent choice from the Scons point of view

Yeah, they might break back into the low 20s in polling.
The thought of SCons & SLab bickering over who gets to be distant second fair breaks my heart.

The Scons would be the only party supporting the 100,000 plus North Sea jobs and duelling the A9 plus of course they are pro the union

That's a Harry Potter sequel I wasn't expecting.

Makes sense I suppose - Rowling lives just off the A9 in Aberfeldy.

And of course if Kate Forbes won she would be very much on the same page as the Scons apart from on independence

Parties with one huge and overwhelming constitutional policy, such as the SNP are in a sort of dilemma.

If you drill down on what they want, they want two constitutional things (I hope).
1) Scottish independence in
2) A multi party democracy.

The second means of course that the first aim intends that all shades of democratically accountable opinion, from Jezza to Lee Anderson to JRM will be held and get elected in the new country.

And the more the SNP has views other than independence, especially slightly off the wall ones, the more they look like a faction not a national movement.

Which is why you need the Scotland Liberation Front as well as the Front for the Liberation of Scotland - and possibly The Liberation of Scotland Front too.

This is just Spiking Separatist Movements 101.

Canada has a clever one.

By ensuring that all Government documents must be bilingual in French & English, they created a large number of Francophones whose livelihoods depend on translating documents from English into French (or vice versa). Much (if not all) of the translation is redundant.

An independent Quebec would be Francophone and have no need of an army of translators. Nor would Anglophone rump Canada need so many translators.

Hence, the Canadian Government created French speakers with a vested interest in saying 'Non' to an independent Quebec.

Certainly enough to have changed the result of the last referendum.

Not entirely sure this specific theory holds water, although the broader point is surely right.

The UK has made no attempt I can see to persuade the Scottish (or Welsh) bureaucratic elite to maintain the Union.

This elite tend not be especially business savvy, and have not yet realised, in Scotland’s case, that independence means the end of the its Financial Services industry (just as Brexit obviously implied the slow collapse, or continued collapse if you like, of British manufacturing).

In the immortal words of @Sandpit, After a brief interlude, to mourn the passing of the late Queen, i was proved to have been totally correct

What do you think Llafur does? Their priority is creating jobs for Labour cronies (like the Future Generations Commissioner & its dependent bodies).

Whether Wales needs those jobs is irrelevant. Whether they do anything at all is irrelevant

Their function is to create a cadre of people who benefit from the status quo.

Llafur does it to perpetuate Llafurism, not the Union per se.

I don’t believe in non-jobs. But the Union needs to wake up and understand what is happening.

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

OK, but other countries don’t centralise in the way London traditionally has, and they still - shock - have capital cities.

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

OK, but other countries don’t centralise in the way London traditionally has, and they still - shock - have capital cities.

Much like London then. Last time I checked it was our capital city.

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

OK, but other countries don’t centralise in the way London traditionally has, and they still - shock - have capital cities.

If Labour is going to seriously reform The Lords, why not site it in Edinburgh?

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

OK, but other countries don’t centralise in the way London traditionally has, and they still - shock - have capital cities.

If Labour is going to seriously reform The Lords, why not site it in Edinburgh?

Sure, absolutely.

Edinburgh is, if you think about it, Britain’s second capital. It therefore deserves its share of UK-wide institutions.

Personally I do prefer to keep the political class in a single capital, ie London, but I’m attracted to the idea that - while the Houses of Parliament is renovated - that we decant the lot to York, or indeed Edinburgh, for ten years.

Carnyx said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

OK, but other countries don’t centralise in the way London traditionally has, and they still - shock - have capital cities.

If Labour is going to seriously reform The Lords, why not site it in Edinburgh?

The way the Houses of Parlaiment are heading, and the risk of a complete and sudden disaster, they'll be lucky if the Lords end up in a distribution shed in Daventry off the M1/M6 interchange.

Logistically that would make a lot of sense. There's a reason those sheds are in Daventry.

We could take a more continental approach and put it in Strasbourg perhaps?

Carnyx said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons. It should have gone to Leeds (already the northern finance hub, to the extent one exists).

Wrong way for the current lot, I'm afraid. Even when the centre in question is in leafy South Oxon.

https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj-2022-069999

Yes.

I don’t think even the Tory supporters on here really understand how damaging the current regime is to British industry.

New Labour was not that much better, but things declined under Cameron, May was maybe worse and since Johnson we are now at an actual fuck business stage. Rishi, who receives plaudits for being sane, is actively behind the stuff which that article rightly calls “baffling”.

Omnium said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

YBarddCwsc said:

algarkirk said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Eabhal said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Carnyx said:

malcolmg said:

Chelyabinsk said:

malcolmg said:

Taz , the Scottish NI last year was much higher than pensions

You want to be careful, malky - irritability and forgetfulness are symptoms of dementia.

another nasty arsehole , what kind of a creep comes out with stuff like that , GIRUY

I must say your reasoned assessments of the relative merits of the candidates have been pithy and consistent and entirely logical. Nothing wrong with the old brain.

I don't think any of the Scots on here rates Mr Yousaf. Not one?

But maybe we are all old farts on PB.

I have to say the relentless downer on him from PB types who hate the SNP and indy, and have neither a vote in Scotland or in the leadership election is making me warm to him.

I think he would be an excellent choice from the Scons point of view

Yeah, they might break back into the low 20s in polling.
The thought of SCons & SLab bickering over who gets to be distant second fair breaks my heart.

The Scons would be the only party supporting the 100,000 plus North Sea jobs and duelling the A9 plus of course they are pro the union

That's a Harry Potter sequel I wasn't expecting.

Makes sense I suppose - Rowling lives just off the A9 in Aberfeldy.

And of course if Kate Forbes won she would be very much on the same page as the Scons apart from on independence

Parties with one huge and overwhelming constitutional policy, such as the SNP are in a sort of dilemma.

If you drill down on what they want, they want two constitutional things (I hope).
1) Scottish independence in
2) A multi party democracy.

The second means of course that the first aim intends that all shades of democratically accountable opinion, from Jezza to Lee Anderson to JRM will be held and get elected in the new country.

And the more the SNP has views other than independence, especially slightly off the wall ones, the more they look like a faction not a national movement.

Which is why you need the Scotland Liberation Front as well as the Front for the Liberation of Scotland - and possibly The Liberation of Scotland Front too.

This is just Spiking Separatist Movements 101.

Canada has a clever one.

By ensuring that all Government documents must be bilingual in French & English, they created a large number of Francophones whose livelihoods depend on translating documents from English into French (or vice versa). Much (if not all) of the translation is redundant.

An independent Quebec would be Francophone and have no need of an army of translators. Nor would Anglophone rump Canada need so many translators.

Hence, the Canadian Government created French speakers with a vested interest in saying 'Non' to an independent Quebec.

Certainly enough to have changed the result of the last referendum.

Not entirely sure this specific theory holds water, although the broader point is surely right.

The UK has made no attempt I can see to persuade the Scottish (or Welsh) bureaucratic elite to maintain the Union.

This elite tend not be especially business savvy, and have not yet realised, in Scotland’s case, that independence means the end of the its Financial Services industry (just as Brexit obviously implied the slow collapse, or continued collapse if you like, of British manufacturing).

Yes. See this fascinating FT article (££) on the sad decline of Barcelona. The city not the club

Much of it is the usual. Crime, grime, Airbnb, illegal immigration, WFH, covid - but there’s an added element. Loads of major firms - even Catalan banks - have shifted HQs, offices and jobs to relatively booming Madrid

Why? Just the threat of Catalan independence. Too destabilising. Edinburgh would be destroyed by
Indy

The Catalans haven't had a proper try at independence. The Scots have - they had to come cap in hand, and we English allowed them to put their cap back on and said that they'd be full partners. (Rather than a French enclave)

Not that old chesnut yet again , how boring. Next it will eb how do you have a pension , what is your currency. FFS get a grip.

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

OK, but other countries don’t centralise in the way London traditionally has, and they still - shock - have capital cities.

Much like London then. Last time I checked it was our capital city.

You appear to have misunderstood my point.
Britain has grossly over-centralised its institutions in London, in a way unseen most everywhere else, and it is causing a problem for the Union.

I did rather misread your point.

France is similarly centralised, and many other nations are of a different structure (US, Germany and Italy clearly). Portugal, China, Korea and Japan may well be much the same, but I lack the knowledge to say.

I don't agree at all that it creates problems.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Re the election of the next FM will there be public televised hustings?

The FM is elected by parliament vote of MSP's, I assume you mean the leadership of the SNP and supposedly hustings are being proposed.

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

OK, but other countries don’t centralise in the way London traditionally has, and they still - shock - have capital cities.

Much like London then. Last time I checked it was our capital city.

You appear to have misunderstood my point.
Britain has grossly over-centralised its institutions in London, in a way unseen most everywhere else, and it is causing a problem for the Union.

I did rather misread your point.

France is similarly centralised, and many other nations are of a different structure (US, Germany and Italy clearly). Portugal, China, Korea and Japan may well be much the same, but I lack the knowledge to say.

I don't agree at all that it creates problems.

France is less centralised than the UK because it has a much greater level of local devolution.

It also has a “grand projet” mentality which aims to develop cultural and physical infrastructure in the regions.

Insisting that the EU Parliament migrate seasonally to Strasbourg is one (albeit silly) manifestation of it.

In terms of the other countries, there are measures of centralisation and Britain comes “top” (or “bottom”), along with Ireland (probably an Anglo legacy) and one or two Eastern European countries.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Welsh to play on Saturday

Well it will be the first time this year if they do.

Leon said:

To seal the New Lords deal with Scots, the next Labour government should promise to pull down the Giant Jobbie hotel-turd in Edinburgh, and replace it with a noble beautiful stone building in aesthetic keeping with the Athens of the North

I imagine that proposal would get 97.8% approval from most people in Edinburgh. Even the Nats

Of course this is a joke.
But, it’s actually totally, completely, and utterly true.

Off topic, but possibly of interest: In a column on Trump using the transgender issue, David Byler notes that in 2016 observant Christians were less likely than other Trump voters to favor building a border wall, and more likely to see the American economic system favoring the wealthier.
source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/02/21/trump-gender-lgbtq-identity/

(Byler's main point in the column: 'During the Trump administration, American adults — especially White evangelicals — significantly warmed to “bathroom bills,” which require transgender individuals to use the bathroom corresponding to their sex at birth."'

He has data from just two polls, 2017 and 2021, but the consistency of the shift among the religious is quite remarkable. For example, white mainline Protestants moved from 34 percent favoring bathroom bills to 55 percent, while black Protestants moved from 28 to 48 percent.)

I hope Cyclefree will share her thoughts with us on this shift.

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

OK, but other countries don’t centralise in the way London traditionally has, and they still - shock - have capital cities.

Much like London then. Last time I checked it was our capital city.

You appear to have misunderstood my point.
Britain has grossly over-centralised its institutions in London, in a way unseen most everywhere else, and it is causing a problem for the Union.

I did rather misread your point.

France is similarly centralised, and many other nations are of a different structure (US, Germany and Italy clearly). Portugal, China, Korea and Japan may well be much the same, but I lack the knowledge to say.

I don't agree at all that it creates problems.

France is less centralised than the UK because it has a much greater level of local devolution.

It also has a “grand projet” mentality which aims to develop cultural and physical infrastructure in the regions.

Insisting that the EU Parliament migrate seasonally to Strasbourg is one (albeit silly) manifestation of it.

In terms of the other countries, there are measures of centralisation and Britain comes “top” (or “bottom”), along with Ireland (probably an Anglo legacy) and one or two Eastern European countries.

Does seem to be a feature of Eastern Europe, more extreme the further East you go. Even Eastern Germany is much more centralised on Berlin than the West is on its various cities.

TimS said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

OK, but other countries don’t centralise in the way London traditionally has, and they still - shock - have capital cities.

Much like London then. Last time I checked it was our capital city.

You appear to have misunderstood my point.
Britain has grossly over-centralised its institutions in London, in a way unseen most everywhere else, and it is causing a problem for the Union.

I did rather misread your point.

France is similarly centralised, and many other nations are of a different structure (US, Germany and Italy clearly). Portugal, China, Korea and Japan may well be much the same, but I lack the knowledge to say.

I don't agree at all that it creates problems.

Japan and France are both pretty geographically centralised in one grand metropolis but both still have much more devolved local democracy than we do. I think that's one of the UK's biggest democratic weaknesses: too much Westminster control. Wouldn't matter if that control was located in buildings in Birmingham, Belfast and Edinburgh, the issue is not enough subsidiarity.

France also has much more thriving and prosperous second tier cities than Britain even if they are an order of magnitude smaller than Paris. Most are very attractive places to live and work. It's the deep countryside, the inner suburban estates and the marginalised former coal regions where the economic problems are.

It’s fascinating that the UK and France are similar sized economies despite following very different economic policies.

And, as you say, France’s poverty issues are kind of the opposite of the UK’s, apart from the ex-coal regions thing.

TimS said:

Carnyx said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

OK, but other countries don’t centralise in the way London traditionally has, and they still - shock - have capital cities.

If Labour is going to seriously reform The Lords, why not site it in Edinburgh?

The way the Houses of Parlaiment are heading, and the risk of a complete and sudden disaster, they'll be lucky if the Lords end up in a distribution shed in Daventry off the M1/M6 interchange.

Logistically that would make a lot of sense. There's a reason those sheds are in Daventry.

We could take a more continental approach and put it in Strasbourg perhaps?

It requires several stages of development, massive changes in the international order, and, even harder, humility, but the place to put both Houses of Parliament is Dublin, the new capital of a single nation of Ireland and Britain. The New Zealand solution. Put right 1000 years of wrong.

This project not going too well just at the moment.

Eabhal said:

A

Leon said:

To seal the New Lords deal with Scots, the next Labour government should promise to pull down the Giant Jobbie hotel-turd in Edinburgh, and replace it with a noble beautiful stone building in aesthetic keeping with the Athens of the North

I imagine that proposal would get 97.8% approval from most people in Edinburgh. Even the Nats

All they need to do is take the twirly bit off the top . It's actually ok without that.

(I have to look at it for 20 mins on the way to work each morning).

Can't you buy one of those Japanese steel tessen things like in Kagemusha? It'd be very useful keeping the neds and charity muggers off, too, and slashing the tyres of pavement cyclists and over the kersb parkers of Morningside MRAPs.

https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-an-actor-in-samurai-armor-holding-a-japanese-war-fan-grounds-of-nagoya-58304943.html

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

YBarddCwsc said:

algarkirk said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Eabhal said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Carnyx said:

malcolmg said:

Chelyabinsk said:

malcolmg said:

Taz , the Scottish NI last year was much higher than pensions

You want to be careful, malky - irritability and forgetfulness are symptoms of dementia.

another nasty arsehole , what kind of a creep comes out with stuff like that , GIRUY

I must say your reasoned assessments of the relative merits of the candidates have been pithy and consistent and entirely logical. Nothing wrong with the old brain.

I don't think any of the Scots on here rates Mr Yousaf. Not one?

But maybe we are all old farts on PB.

I have to say the relentless downer on him from PB types who hate the SNP and indy, and have neither a vote in Scotland or in the leadership election is making me warm to him.

I think he would be an excellent choice from the Scons point of view

Yeah, they might break back into the low 20s in polling.
The thought of SCons & SLab bickering over who gets to be distant second fair breaks my heart.

The Scons would be the only party supporting the 100,000 plus North Sea jobs and duelling the A9 plus of course they are pro the union

That's a Harry Potter sequel I wasn't expecting.

Makes sense I suppose - Rowling lives just off the A9 in Aberfeldy.

And of course if Kate Forbes won she would be very much on the same page as the Scons apart from on independence

Parties with one huge and overwhelming constitutional policy, such as the SNP are in a sort of dilemma.

If you drill down on what they want, they want two constitutional things (I hope).
1) Scottish independence in
2) A multi party democracy.

The second means of course that the first aim intends that all shades of democratically accountable opinion, from Jezza to Lee Anderson to JRM will be held and get elected in the new country.

And the more the SNP has views other than independence, especially slightly off the wall ones, the more they look like a faction not a national movement.

Which is why you need the Scotland Liberation Front as well as the Front for the Liberation of Scotland - and possibly The Liberation of Scotland Front too.

This is just Spiking Separatist Movements 101.

Canada has a clever one.

By ensuring that all Government documents must be bilingual in French & English, they created a large number of Francophones whose livelihoods depend on translating documents from English into French (or vice versa). Much (if not all) of the translation is redundant.

An independent Quebec would be Francophone and have no need of an army of translators. Nor would Anglophone rump Canada need so many translators.

Hence, the Canadian Government created French speakers with a vested interest in saying 'Non' to an independent Quebec.

Certainly enough to have changed the result of the last referendum.

Not entirely sure this specific theory holds water, although the broader point is surely right.

The UK has made no attempt I can see to persuade the Scottish (or Welsh) bureaucratic elite to maintain the Union.

This elite tend not be especially business savvy, and have not yet realised, in Scotland’s case, that independence means the end of the its Financial Services industry (just as Brexit obviously implied the slow collapse, or continued collapse if you like, of British manufacturing).

Yes. See this fascinating FT article (££) on the sad decline of Barcelona. The city not the club

Much of it is the usual. Crime, grime, Airbnb, illegal immigration, WFH, covid - but there’s an added element. Loads of major firms - even Catalan banks - have shifted HQs, offices and jobs to relatively booming Madrid

Why? Just the threat of Catalan independence. Too destabilising. Edinburgh would be destroyed by
Indy

This is very true: Madrid was - from a business perspective - always Barcelona's poorer cousin, but in the last couple of years, it's really changed. No one wants to put money into Barcelona any more.

Omnium said:

Leon said:

Omnium said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

OK, but other countries don’t centralise in the way London traditionally has, and they still - shock - have capital cities.

If Labour is going to seriously reform The Lords, why not site it in Edinburgh?

Why? Edinburgh is tiny and insignificant.

Because it’s beautiful and it’s the capital of Scotland and it’s where the king has his second palace. It is the sister city of london, constitutionally

So make that symbolism real. Make Edinburgh the location of the New Lords. Any issues with comms can now be solved electronically

Or make the Lords itinerant. Sitting in london for two or four years, then Edinburgh, then Belfast, then Cardiff

@gardenwalker is right. It’s time to be proactive and imaginative about the Union

There are quite a few better cities, and none of them plan to decamp with any investment we might make. I see no reason at all not to centralise in a small nation anyway.

I struggle to think of which other cities have the capital city vibe of Edinburgh. Yes there are bigger industrialised cities with more thriving nightlife (including just up the road in Glasgow) but they don't feel like seats of government.

If you were looking for other much smaller historic cities that look the part for an English regional parliament possible options would be Oxford, Winchester, Bath, Warwick, York or Durham.

Gardenwalker said:

Carnyx said:

Gardenwalker said:

Leon said:

To seal the New Lords deal with Scots, the next Labour government should promise to pull down the Giant Jobbie hotel-turd in Edinburgh, and replace it with a noble beautiful stone building in aesthetic keeping with the Athens of the North

I imagine that proposal would get 97.8% approval from most people in Edinburgh. Even the Nats

Of course this is a joke.
But, it’s actually totally, completely, and utterly true.

The last time a New Labour government in London pulled down an eyesore and built a "noble beautiful stdone building etc" we Scots got all the blame for the result, relentless attacks from the Tory media, etc. etc. You know, down opposite Holyroodhouse.

The Tory media are their own worst enemy.
Someone should do a “before” and “after” on Daily Mail front pages. Look at the way they trumpeted Truss’s budget even as the financial markets started to wobble.

I can’t make up my mind up about the architecture of the Scottish Parliament. it’s been there long enough now to allow for critical opinion to consolidate. Do you think it has been successful?

Politically? Disastrous - but anything would have been criticised.

I rather like it. But I don't have to maintian it. And I think the chamber is infinitely superior to the London effort. At least everyone can sit down, and the voting system is what you would expect in a city of the Enlightenment.

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

OK, but other countries don’t centralise in the way London traditionally has, and they still - shock - have capital cities.

Much like London then. Last time I checked it was our capital city.

You appear to have misunderstood my point.
Britain has grossly over-centralised its institutions in London, in a way unseen most everywhere else, and it is causing a problem for the Union.

I did rather misread your point.

France is similarly centralised, and many other nations are of a different structure (US, Germany and Italy clearly). Portugal, China, Korea and Japan may well be much the same, but I lack the knowledge to say.

I don't agree at all that it creates problems.

S Korea more so than us; nearly half the population live in the greater Seoul metropolitan area.
But they understand, and have for decades, the importance of manufacturing for their economy.

Plenty of other problems, but national identity isn’t one of them.

Gardenwalker said:

Carnyx said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Leon said:

To seal the New Lords deal with Scots, the next Labour government should promise to pull down the Giant Jobbie hotel-turd in Edinburgh, and replace it with a noble beautiful stone building in aesthetic keeping with the Athens of the North

I imagine that proposal would get 97.8% approval from most people in Edinburgh. Even the Nats

Of course this is a joke.
But, it’s actually totally, completely, and utterly true.

I’m quite serious. And yes it is true

Everyone loathes that horrible stupid poo building. The one way to slightly endear HMG to Scots would be to pull it down for something handsome and, dare I say it, a tiny bit British

"tiny bit British"

Like this newish HMG (London) embassy:

https://www.google.com/maps/@55.9524197,-3.1829895,3a,90y,31.72h,98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFTFjYoV5b8HriED0rlAmaQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Another missed opportunity by HMG.

Given the wealth of British architectural talent, it kind of takes a special sort of stupidity. There’s nothing wrong with the development per se, but there’s nothing right about it either.

Given it's right opposite the Royal High School, which was slated for the Parliament till Labour decided it would be pandering to the Nationalists [sic] ...

And just compare it with what HMG used to be able tdo do in the form of St Andrew House just along, the palace of the Satraps of Old ...

Carnyx said:

Anabobazina said:

Regan has been gently sliding in without actually saying or doing much. It’s very possible she could turbocharge or self-destruct her campaign as soon as a journalist talks to her

I was wondering if I was almost the only one who noticed how she'd been ignored. Apart of course for our lunar lagomorph commenting on her fashion and footwear sense. And one of our Tories rather ungentlemanily (?sp) referring to the lady by her now divorced husband's surname.

I have clipped this straight out an episode of Borgen

https://twitter.com/ConnorGillies/status/1628377072295981060?cxt=HHwWiMC9qbuUlJktAAAA

TimS said:

Omnium said:

Leon said:

Omnium said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

One of the ways to maintain the Union (apart from addressing the corrupted devolution settlements) is the funding of Union-wide institutions to be located (or shifted) in the nations.

For example, I could imagine Scotland hosting Britain’s Space Centre (albeit the current industry is clustered around Oxford), an Arctic Centre, and a perma-location for Britain’s Scandinavian co-operation.

Scotland could/should even host the NHS HQ (currently no such thing really exists, because health is split into national entities, but one can imagine a union-wide research and procurement body).

Northern Ireland, or again Scotland, could host a centre which focus efforts around Sustainable Energy. Ditto Wales for farming and food science.

You want to place such bodies in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, or Cardiff.

Previous efforts to do such things have not been especially successful as (for example) the Statistics body was just dumped in Newport which (a) has no obvious logic behind it, (b) is not going to create any spin-off effects; and (c) is not the sort of place anyone actually wants to work.

Treasury’s positioning of its northern branch in already-prosperous Darlington was another stupid move, for slightly different reasons.

Or just accept that obvious logic that London is your capital city.

OK, but other countries don’t centralise in the way London traditionally has, and they still - shock - have capital cities.

If Labour is going to seriously reform The Lords, why not site it in Edinburgh?

Why? Edinburgh is tiny and insignificant.

Because it’s beautiful and it’s the capital of Scotland and it’s where the king has his second palace. It is the sister city of london, constitutionally

So make that symbolism real. Make Edinburgh the location of the New Lords. Any issues with comms can now be solved electronically

Or make the Lords itinerant. Sitting in london for two or four years, then Edinburgh, then Belfast, then Cardiff

@gardenwalker is right. It’s time to be proactive and imaginative about the Union

There are quite a few better cities, and none of them plan to decamp with any investment we might make. I see no reason at all not to centralise in a small nation anyway.

I struggle to think of which other cities have the capital city vibe of Edinburgh. Yes there are bigger industrialised cities with more thriving nightlife (including just up the road in Glasgow) but they don't feel like seats of government.

If you were looking for other much smaller historic cities that look the part for an English regional parliament possible options would be Oxford, Winchester, Bath, Warwick, York or Durham.

London is the capital city - we don't need capital city vibe. It' much more about great city vibe. I'm sure that mamy UK cities are happy to deliver.

Carnyx said:

Gardenwalker said:

Carnyx said:

Gardenwalker said:

Leon said:

To seal the New Lords deal with Scots, the next Labour government should promise to pull down the Giant Jobbie hotel-turd in Edinburgh, and replace it with a noble beautiful stone building in aesthetic keeping with the Athens of the North

I imagine that proposal would get 97.8% approval from most people in Edinburgh. Even the Nats

Of course this is a joke.
But, it’s actually totally, completely, and utterly true.

The last time a New Labour government in London pulled down an eyesore and built a "noble beautiful stdone building etc" we Scots got all the blame for the result, relentless attacks from the Tory media, etc. etc. You know, down opposite Holyroodhouse.

The Tory media are their own worst enemy.
Someone should do a “before” and “after” on Daily Mail front pages. Look at the way they trumpeted Truss’s budget even as the financial markets started to wobble.

I can’t make up my mind up about the architecture of the Scottish Parliament. it’s been there long enough now to allow for critical opinion to consolidate. Do you think it has been successful?

Politically? Disastrous - but anything would have been criticised.

I rather like it. But I don't have to maintian it. And I think the chamber is infinitely superior to the London effort. At least everyone can sit down, and the voting system is what you would expect in a city of the Enlightenment.

Holyrood is an ugly, fussy, overwrought and way overpriced building. The interior I agree is definitely
superior to the exterior (not hard)

You can’t really compare it with Westminster. The latter is a UNESCO listed global icon, architectural masterpiece and home to Westminster Hall, one of the greatest single architectural spaces in human civilisation - for its history and its roof

And I speak as a big fan of Edinburgh. A magnificent city. The juxtaposition of the Georgian new town and the late medieval old town, plus Arthur’s Seat, etc - world class

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

YBarddCwsc said:

algarkirk said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Eabhal said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Carnyx said:

malcolmg said:

Chelyabinsk said:

malcolmg said:

Taz , the Scottish NI last year was much higher than pensions

You want to be careful, malky - irritability and forgetfulness are symptoms of dementia.

another nasty arsehole , what kind of a creep comes out with stuff like that , GIRUY

I must say your reasoned assessments of the relative merits of the candidates have been pithy and consistent and entirely logical. Nothing wrong with the old brain.

I don't think any of the Scots on here rates Mr Yousaf. Not one?

But maybe we are all old farts on PB.

I have to say the relentless downer on him from PB types who hate the SNP and indy, and have neither a vote in Scotland or in the leadership election is making me warm to him.

I think he would be an excellent choice from the Scons point of view

Yeah, they might break back into the low 20s in polling.
The thought of SCons & SLab bickering over who gets to be distant second fair breaks my heart.

The Scons would be the only party supporting the 100,000 plus North Sea jobs and duelling the A9 plus of course they are pro the union

That's a Harry Potter sequel I wasn't expecting.

Makes sense I suppose - Rowling lives just off the A9 in Aberfeldy.

And of course if Kate Forbes won she would be very much on the same page as the Scons apart from on independence

Parties with one huge and overwhelming constitutional policy, such as the SNP are in a sort of dilemma.

If you drill down on what they want, they want two constitutional things (I hope).
1) Scottish independence in
2) A multi party democracy.

The second means of course that the first aim intends that all shades of democratically accountable opinion, from Jezza to Lee Anderson to JRM will be held and get elected in the new country.

And the more the SNP has views other than independence, especially slightly off the wall ones, the more they look like a faction not a national movement.

Which is why you need the Scotland Liberation Front as well as the Front for the Liberation of Scotland - and possibly The Liberation of Scotland Front too.

This is just Spiking Separatist Movements 101.

Canada has a clever one.

By ensuring that all Government documents must be bilingual in French & English, they created a large number of Francophones whose livelihoods depend on translating documents from English into French (or vice versa). Much (if not all) of the translation is redundant.

An independent Quebec would be Francophone and have no need of an army of translators. Nor would Anglophone rump Canada need so many translators.

Hence, the Canadian Government created French speakers with a vested interest in saying 'Non' to an independent Quebec.

Certainly enough to have changed the result of the last referendum.

Not entirely sure this specific theory holds water, although the broader point is surely right.

The UK has made no attempt I can see to persuade the Scottish (or Welsh) bureaucratic elite to maintain the Union.

This elite tend not be especially business savvy, and have not yet realised, in Scotland’s case, that independence means the end of the its Financial Services industry (just as Brexit obviously implied the slow collapse, or continued collapse if you like, of British manufacturing).

Yes. See this fascinating FT article (££) on the sad decline of Barcelona. The city not the club

Much of it is the usual. Crime, grime, Airbnb, illegal immigration, WFH, covid - but there’s an added element. Loads of major firms - even Catalan banks - have shifted HQs, offices and jobs to relatively booming Madrid

Why? Just the threat of Catalan independence. Too destabilising. Edinburgh would be destroyed by
Indy

This is very true: Madrid was - from a business perspective - always Barcelona's poorer cousin, but in the last couple of years, it's really changed. No one wants to put money into Barcelona any more.

Freddie Mercury's song was so good I can't get past Barcelona.

Leon said:

Depressing news. The Onion has gone Woke. And it’s now unfunny. This is worse than The Daily Mash


https://twitter.com/theonion/status/1628443296803569667?s=46&t=90KZrjSN_pcn7zAWWF5MPQ

The past few weeks have shown that Woke is a paper tiger and can be checked.

I wish more people had the courage to do so.

Leon said:

Carnyx said:

Gardenwalker said:

Carnyx said:

Gardenwalker said:

Leon said:

To seal the New Lords deal with Scots, the next Labour government should promise to pull down the Giant Jobbie hotel-turd in Edinburgh, and replace it with a noble beautiful stone building in aesthetic keeping with the Athens of the North

I imagine that proposal would get 97.8% approval from most people in Edinburgh. Even the Nats

Of course this is a joke.
But, it’s actually totally, completely, and utterly true.

The last time a New Labour government in London pulled down an eyesore and built a "noble beautiful stdone building etc" we Scots got all the blame for the result, relentless attacks from the Tory media, etc. etc. You know, down opposite Holyroodhouse.

The Tory media are their own worst enemy.
Someone should do a “before” and “after” on Daily Mail front pages. Look at the way they trumpeted Truss’s budget even as the financial markets started to wobble.

I can’t make up my mind up about the architecture of the Scottish Parliament. it’s been there long enough now to allow for critical opinion to consolidate. Do you think it has been successful?

Politically? Disastrous - but anything would have been criticised.

I rather like it. But I don't have to maintian it. And I think the chamber is infinitely superior to the London effort. At least everyone can sit down, and the voting system is what you would expect in a city of the Enlightenment.

Holyrood is an ugly, fussy, overwrought and way overpriced building. The interior I agree is definitely
superior to the exterior (not hard)

You can’t really compare it with Westminster. The latter is a UNESCO listed global icon, architectural masterpiece and home to Westminster Hall, one of the greatest single architectural spaces in human civilisation - for its history and its roof

And I speak as a big fan of Edinburgh. A magnificent city. The juxtaposition of the Georgian new town and the late medieval old town, plus Arthur’s Seat, etc - world class

Westminster is falling to pieces and full of dickhead politicians who won't authorise its essential refurbishment.

It is very close to a catastrophic failure, Notre Dame style. And that is not hyperbole.

Gardenwalker said:

TimS said:

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

YBarddCwsc said:

algarkirk said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Eabhal said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Carnyx said:

malcolmg said:

Chelyabinsk said:

malcolmg said:

Taz , the Scottish NI last year was much higher than pensions

You want to be careful, malky - irritability and forgetfulness are symptoms of dementia.

another nasty arsehole , what kind of a creep comes out with stuff like that , GIRUY

I must say your reasoned assessments of the relative merits of the candidates have been pithy and consistent and entirely logical. Nothing wrong with the old brain.

I don't think any of the Scots on here rates Mr Yousaf. Not one?

But maybe we are all old farts on PB.

I have to say the relentless downer on him from PB types who hate the SNP and indy, and have neither a vote in Scotland or in the leadership election is making me warm to him.

I think he would be an excellent choice from the Scons point of view

Yeah, they might break back into the low 20s in polling.
The thought of SCons & SLab bickering over who gets to be distant second fair breaks my heart.

The Scons would be the only party supporting the 100,000 plus North Sea jobs and duelling the A9 plus of course they are pro the union

That's a Harry Potter sequel I wasn't expecting.

Makes sense I suppose - Rowling lives just off the A9 in Aberfeldy.

And of course if Kate Forbes won she would be very much on the same page as the Scons apart from on independence

Parties with one huge and overwhelming constitutional policy, such as the SNP are in a sort of dilemma.

If you drill down on what they want, they want two constitutional things (I hope).
1) Scottish independence in
2) A multi party democracy.

The second means of course that the first aim intends that all shades of democratically accountable opinion, from Jezza to Lee Anderson to JRM will be held and get elected in the new country.

And the more the SNP has views other than independence, especially slightly off the wall ones, the more they look like a faction not a national movement.

Which is why you need the Scotland Liberation Front as well as the Front for the Liberation of Scotland - and possibly The Liberation of Scotland Front too.

This is just Spiking Separatist Movements 101.

Canada has a clever one.

By ensuring that all Government documents must be bilingual in French & English, they created a large number of Francophones whose livelihoods depend on translating documents from English into French (or vice versa). Much (if not all) of the translation is redundant.

An independent Quebec would be Francophone and have no need of an army of translators. Nor would Anglophone rump Canada need so many translators.

Hence, the Canadian Government created French speakers with a vested interest in saying 'Non' to an independent Quebec.

Certainly enough to have changed the result of the last referendum.

Not entirely sure this specific theory holds water, although the broader point is surely right.

The UK has made no attempt I can see to persuade the Scottish (or Welsh) bureaucratic elite to maintain the Union.

This elite tend not be especially business savvy, and have not yet realised, in Scotland’s case, that independence means the end of the its Financial Services industry (just as Brexit obviously implied the slow collapse, or continued collapse if you like, of British manufacturing).

Yes. See this fascinating FT article (££) on the sad decline of Barcelona. The city not the club

Much of it is the usual. Crime, grime, Airbnb, illegal immigration, WFH, covid - but there’s an added element. Loads of major firms - even Catalan banks - have shifted HQs, offices and jobs to relatively booming Madrid

Why? Just the threat of Catalan independence. Too destabilising. Edinburgh would be destroyed by
Indy

This is very true: Madrid was - from a business perspective - always Barcelona's poorer cousin, but in the last couple of years, it's really changed. No one wants to put money into Barcelona any more.

Poor Hong Kong is suffering a similar fate. Rio and Cape Town always seemed to have this second city problem - pretty but socially toxic. And over in the US, though not for all the same reasons, San Francisco.

At the end of the day, the world doesn’t owe any particular city a living.

Hong Kong prospered as an Asian entrepôt, China’s rule is slowly killing that model.

Rio and Cape Town don’t seem to be able to deliver on some vital social infrastructure.

San Fransciso is pricing itself out of growth, etc.

In Britain, Birmingham et al is not allowed to even have an opinion on how it is to make its way in the world; the Treasury insists that they can’t even take a piss without asking for permission (almost literally).

This isn't true, and I worry that you living in the US and a Kiwi by origin might not make you the best qualified to comment.

Casino_Royale said:

Leon said:

Carnyx said:

Gardenwalker said:

Carnyx said:

Gardenwalker said:

Leon said:

To seal the New Lords deal with Scots, the next Labour government should promise to pull down the Giant Jobbie hotel-turd in Edinburgh, and replace it with a noble beautiful stone building in aesthetic keeping with the Athens of the North

I imagine that proposal would get 97.8% approval from most people in Edinburgh. Even the Nats

Of course this is a joke.
But, it’s actually totally, completely, and utterly true.

The last time a New Labour government in London pulled down an eyesore and built a "noble beautiful stdone building etc" we Scots got all the blame for the result, relentless attacks from the Tory media, etc. etc. You know, down opposite Holyroodhouse.

The Tory media are their own worst enemy.
Someone should do a “before” and “after” on Daily Mail front pages. Look at the way they trumpeted Truss’s budget even as the financial markets started to wobble.

I can’t make up my mind up about the architecture of the Scottish Parliament. it’s been there long enough now to allow for critical opinion to consolidate. Do you think it has been successful?

Politically? Disastrous - but anything would have been criticised.

I rather like it. But I don't have to maintian it. And I think the chamber is infinitely superior to the London effort. At least everyone can sit down, and the voting system is what you would expect in a city of the Enlightenment.

Holyrood is an ugly, fussy, overwrought and way overpriced building. The interior I agree is definitely
superior to the exterior (not hard)

You can’t really compare it with Westminster. The latter is a UNESCO listed global icon, architectural masterpiece and home to Westminster Hall, one of the greatest single architectural spaces in human civilisation - for its history and its roof

And I speak as a big fan of Edinburgh. A magnificent city. The juxtaposition of the Georgian new town and the late medieval old town, plus Arthur’s Seat, etc - world class

Westminster is falling to pieces and full of dickhead politicians who won't authorise its essential refurbishment.

It is very close to a catastrophic failure, Notre Dame style. And that is not hyperbole.

Indeed so. It would be an incalculable loss

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Welsh to play on Saturday

Welsh to turn up is what you mean.

Gardenwalker said:

Omnium said:

Gardenwalker said:

TimS said:

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

YBarddCwsc said:

algarkirk said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Eabhal said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Carnyx said:

malcolmg said:

Chelyabinsk said:

malcolmg said:

Taz , the Scottish NI last year was much higher than pensions

You want to be careful, malky - irritability and forgetfulness are symptoms of dementia.

another nasty arsehole , what kind of a creep comes out with stuff like that , GIRUY

I must say your reasoned assessments of the relative merits of the candidates have been pithy and consistent and entirely logical. Nothing wrong with the old brain.

I don't think any of the Scots on here rates Mr Yousaf. Not one?

But maybe we are all old farts on PB.

I have to say the relentless downer on him from PB types who hate the SNP and indy, and have neither a vote in Scotland or in the leadership election is making me warm to him.

I think he would be an excellent choice from the Scons point of view

Yeah, they might break back into the low 20s in polling.
The thought of SCons & SLab bickering over who gets to be distant second fair breaks my heart.

The Scons would be the only party supporting the 100,000 plus North Sea jobs and duelling the A9 plus of course they are pro the union

That's a Harry Potter sequel I wasn't expecting.

Makes sense I suppose - Rowling lives just off the A9 in Aberfeldy.

And of course if Kate Forbes won she would be very much on the same page as the Scons apart from on independence

Parties with one huge and overwhelming constitutional policy, such as the SNP are in a sort of dilemma.

If you drill down on what they want, they want two constitutional things (I hope).
1) Scottish independence in
2) A multi party democracy.

The second means of course that the first aim intends that all shades of democratically accountable opinion, from Jezza to Lee Anderson to JRM will be held and get elected in the new country.

And the more the SNP has views other than independence, especially slightly off the wall ones, the more they look like a faction not a national movement.

Which is why you need the Scotland Liberation Front as well as the Front for the Liberation of Scotland - and possibly The Liberation of Scotland Front too.

This is just Spiking Separatist Movements 101.

Canada has a clever one.

By ensuring that all Government documents must be bilingual in French & English, they created a large number of Francophones whose livelihoods depend on translating documents from English into French (or vice versa). Much (if not all) of the translation is redundant.

An independent Quebec would be Francophone and have no need of an army of translators. Nor would Anglophone rump Canada need so many translators.

Hence, the Canadian Government created French speakers with a vested interest in saying 'Non' to an independent Quebec.

Certainly enough to have changed the result of the last referendum.

Not entirely sure this specific theory holds water, although the broader point is surely right.

The UK has made no attempt I can see to persuade the Scottish (or Welsh) bureaucratic elite to maintain the Union.

This elite tend not be especially business savvy, and have not yet realised, in Scotland’s case, that independence means the end of the its Financial Services industry (just as Brexit obviously implied the slow collapse, or continued collapse if you like, of British manufacturing).

Yes. See this fascinating FT article (££) on the sad decline of Barcelona. The city not the club

Much of it is the usual. Crime, grime, Airbnb, illegal immigration, WFH, covid - but there’s an added element. Loads of major firms - even Catalan banks - have shifted HQs, offices and jobs to relatively booming Madrid

Why? Just the threat of Catalan independence. Too destabilising. Edinburgh would be destroyed by
Indy

This is very true: Madrid was - from a business perspective - always Barcelona's poorer cousin, but in the last couple of years, it's really changed. No one wants to put money into Barcelona any more.

Poor Hong Kong is suffering a similar fate. Rio and Cape Town always seemed to have this second city problem - pretty but socially toxic. And over in the US, though not for all the same reasons, San Francisco.

At the end of the day, the world doesn’t owe any particular city a living.

Hong Kong prospered as an Asian entrepôt, China’s rule is slowly killing that model.

Rio and Cape Town don’t seem to be able to deliver on some vital social infrastructure.

San Fransciso is pricing itself out of growth, etc.

In Britain, Birmingham et al is not allowed to even have an opinion on how it is to make its way in the world; the Treasury insists that they can’t even take a piss without asking for permission (almost literally).

This isn't true, and I worry that you living in the US and a Kiwi by origin might not make you the best qualified to comment.

Sorry, which bit isn’t true?

Gardenwalker : "In Britain, Birmingham et al is not allowed to even have an opinion on how it is to make its way in the world;"

Casino_Royale said:

Leon said:

Depressing news. The Onion has gone Woke. And it’s now unfunny. This is worse than The Daily Mash


https://twitter.com/theonion/status/1628443296803569667?s=46&t=90KZrjSN_pcn7zAWWF5MPQ

The past few weeks have shown that Woke is a paper tiger and can be checked.

I wish more people had the courage to do so.

How so? No one has checked me.

FrankBooth said:

I don't think regionalism is really the answer to our economic problems or only at the margins. The problem is poor productivity caused by poor investment not concentration in London. There has been a failure of imagination in our economic policy making for several generations. What we ended up with was being an attraction to the global rich/multinationals by having non-dom/low corporate tax and liberalised finance. But the benefits were limited and obviously centred on London. From what someone was saying earlier Blair/Hague suggested we should be looking to China!

That's not the obvious example to me. Instead look at countries who have in their various ways achieved economic success - Sweden, the Netherlands, the USA, hell even Singapore - and see what we might like to borrow.

“I don't think regionalism is the answer”

When the factory that employed forty thousand now doesn’t even employ four thousand, when your community ignored for decades needs levelling up, understandably the buttons of regionalism and nationalism get pressed by some - but only by idiots, because the actual opposite is the answer, working together and cooperating against big money big power and stateless soulless globalisation.

A freedom which comes with empty pockets, is no freedom at all.