Can anyone confirm if parliament need to pass an act to revoke Andrew M-W's titles of Duke of York, Earl of Inverness etc? Assuming this would sail through on the King's advice
That's what was being said last week. I think one is already in the system so could be given proper time and amended accordingly
Can anyone confirm if parliament need to pass an act to revoke Andrew M-W's titles of Duke of York, Earl of Inverness etc? Assuming this would sail through on the King's advice
Yes I believe an Act of Parliament is required. Also to remove the title of Prince, which was conferred by Act of Parliament. He can't disclaim the peerage as you have to be within a year of inheriting it to do so.
Can anyone confirm if parliament need to pass an act to revoke Andrew M-W's titles of Duke of York, Earl of Inverness etc? Assuming this would sail through on the King's advice
That's what was being said last week. I think one is already in the system so could be given proper time and amended accordingly
FON of course but Reeves needs to do some tax and spend in the budget to reduce the Green total and the Tories need to win back some Reform voters for the normal order to be restored
Its a fact that Labour have been shedding far more voters to Greens/PC/ LDs/YP than they have to Ref/Con.
Voters have somewhere else to go. Why didn't anyone tell them?
Oh, wait. Some of us did.
There have been some defections at Council level. I wonder when the MPs start to do so.
There has been more lost Labour voters to Labour's left to LDs and Greens and Plaid than Reform yes.
The key swing voters though are those who went for Boris in 2019, voted for Starmer last year and are now backing Farage. Unless Labour can get massive tactical votes from the LDs and Greens in marginal Labour held seats to beat Reform (the Greens will be mainly contenders in inner city seats Reform would not be contenders anyway)
Bizarrely, it would appear from the Buckingham Palace statement that Prince Andrew remains eighth in line to the throne and a Counsellor of State. So, legally he could still stand in for King Charles, if necessary
As @patrickkmaguire and I reported in our book, Angela Rayner wanted to use Charles's coronation to revise legislation and remove Prince Andrew as a councillor of state. She felt she could not justify perpetuating "that nonce's" role in public life or the royal pecking order.
Bizarrely, it would appear from the Buckingham Palace statement that Prince Andrew remains eighth in line to the throne and a Counsellor of State. So, legally he could still stand in for King Charles, if necessary
As @patrickkmaguire and I reported in our book, Angela Rayner wanted to use Charles's coronation to revise legislation and remove Prince Andrew as a councillor of state. She felt she could not justify perpetuating "that nonce's" role in public life or the royal pecking order.
Can't change succession without agreement of all 15 Commonwealth Realms, or the monarchy can split.
It was a joke on @Foxy saying Andrew was being sent to Coventry. Which, for the avoidance of doubt, is not in Norfolk
"Sent to Coventry" is an old English idiom:
"To send one to Coventry; a punishment inflicted by officers of the army on such of their brethren as are testy, or have been guilty of improper behaviour, not worthy the cognizance of a court martial. The person sent to Coventry is considered as absent; no one must speak to or answer any question he asks, except relative to duty, under penalty of being also sent to the same place. On a proper submission, the penitent is recalled, and welcomed by the mess, as just returned from a journey to Coventry.[4]"
Can anyone confirm if parliament need to pass an act to revoke Andrew M-W's titles of Duke of York, Earl of Inverness etc? Assuming this would sail through on the King's advice
That's what was being said last week. I think one is already in the system so could be given proper time and amended accordingly
The risk is that it opens a debate on other aspects of the Monarchy.
Bizarrely, it would appear from the Buckingham Palace statement that Prince Andrew remains eighth in line to the throne and a Counsellor of State. So, legally he could still stand in for King Charles, if necessary
This isn't bizarre at all. He remains a Prince and Duke of York until an Act is passed stripping him of the titles. The same Act could remove him from the line of succession and as a Counsellor of State
Rachel Reeves is still chancellor after making an “inadvertent mistake” in failing to apply for a licence to let her family home in south London.
A brief excitement swept through Westminster this afternoon when No 10 said emails between the chancellor’s husband and the letting agent had “come to light”. They had not been published when this newsletter went out, but the lettings agency said it had apologised to Reeves for an “oversight” in not applying for a licence.
But Angela Rayner is no longer deputy prime minister after making a “mistake” in which she “acted with integrity”, according to the adviser on ministerial interests, in failing to pay the required amount of stamp duty on a property purchase.
The amounts of money involved may be similar, in that Reeves’s error may cost her not just the £945 for a licence but a year’s rent of £38,000 as well. Rayner is repaying an estimated £40,000 in additional stamp duty.
I have commented that it is hard to see the difference in principle between the two cases – and I speculate that the real difference is that Keir Starmer was content to see Rayner go but desperate to keep Reeves, an ally who is not a threat to his position, in place.
Licenses for single family residence rentals are basically automatically granted, so -in terms of scale- it's not really comparable.
Do you still think that it was reasonable for her to not know she needed a licence, because you didn't know whether you needed one?
You weren't campaigning for selective landlord licensing in Jan 2023 were you?
Oh come on @BlancheLivermore, I was all for calling for Rayner's resignation because she dodged taxes (or at the very least took actions to remain ignorant of them). That was a serious offence: it was, I believe, an act of moral turpitude, and I have a very low tolerence for that.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to decieve or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
Can anyone confirm if parliament need to pass an act to revoke Andrew M-W's titles of Duke of York, Earl of Inverness etc? Assuming this would sail through on the King's advice
That's what was being said last week. I think one is already in the system so could be given proper time and amended accordingly
The risk is that it opens a debate on other aspects of the Monarchy.
Possibly, if it's taken nearly 70 years to get from hereditary peers to life peers I'd be surprised if anything came of it quickly
Rachel Reeves is still chancellor after making an “inadvertent mistake” in failing to apply for a licence to let her family home in south London.
A brief excitement swept through Westminster this afternoon when No 10 said emails between the chancellor’s husband and the letting agent had “come to light”. They had not been published when this newsletter went out, but the lettings agency said it had apologised to Reeves for an “oversight” in not applying for a licence.
But Angela Rayner is no longer deputy prime minister after making a “mistake” in which she “acted with integrity”, according to the adviser on ministerial interests, in failing to pay the required amount of stamp duty on a property purchase.
The amounts of money involved may be similar, in that Reeves’s error may cost her not just the £945 for a licence but a year’s rent of £38,000 as well. Rayner is repaying an estimated £40,000 in additional stamp duty.
I have commented that it is hard to see the difference in principle between the two cases – and I speculate that the real difference is that Keir Starmer was content to see Rayner go but desperate to keep Reeves, an ally who is not a threat to his position, in place.
Licenses for single family residence rentals are basically automatically granted, so -in terms of scale- it's not really comparable.
Do you still think that it was reasonable for her to not know she needed a licence, because you didn't know whether you needed one?
You weren't campaigning for selective landlord licensing in Jan 2023 were you?
Oh come on @BlancheLivermore, I was all for calling for Rayner's resignation because she dodged taxes (or at the very least took actions to remain ignorant of them). That was a serious offence: it was, I believe, an act of moral turpitude, and I have a very low tolerence for that.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to decieve or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
I haven't mentioned Rayner or sackings or anything except the simple question I asked you
You last night said something along the lines of how was she supposed to know she needed a licence, I had to check if I needed one
Do you stand by that assessment, or do you concede that, having campaigned for these licences, she obviously knew that she might well need one?
Rachel Reeves is still chancellor after making an “inadvertent mistake” in failing to apply for a licence to let her family home in south London.
A brief excitement swept through Westminster this afternoon when No 10 said emails between the chancellor’s husband and the letting agent had “come to light”. They had not been published when this newsletter went out, but the lettings agency said it had apologised to Reeves for an “oversight” in not applying for a licence.
But Angela Rayner is no longer deputy prime minister after making a “mistake” in which she “acted with integrity”, according to the adviser on ministerial interests, in failing to pay the required amount of stamp duty on a property purchase.
The amounts of money involved may be similar, in that Reeves’s error may cost her not just the £945 for a licence but a year’s rent of £38,000 as well. Rayner is repaying an estimated £40,000 in additional stamp duty.
I have commented that it is hard to see the difference in principle between the two cases – and I speculate that the real difference is that Keir Starmer was content to see Rayner go but desperate to keep Reeves, an ally who is not a threat to his position, in place.
Licenses for single family residence rentals are basically automatically granted, so -in terms of scale- it's not really comparable.
Do you still think that it was reasonable for her to not know she needed a licence, because you didn't know whether you needed one?
You weren't campaigning for selective landlord licensing in Jan 2023 were you?
Oh come on @BlancheLivermore, I was all for calling for Rayner's resignation because she dodged taxes (or at the very least took actions to remain ignorant of them). That was a serious offence: it was, I believe, an act of moral turpitude, and I have a very low tolerence for that.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to decieve or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
Reading between the lines, there was a bit more going on at that letting agency than they are admitting.
People don’t ‘suddenly resign’ without handover meetings unless there is something suboptimal in the background.
Under such circumstances it is very normal for such errors to occur - and people not want to talk about it.
Rachel Reeves is still chancellor after making an “inadvertent mistake” in failing to apply for a licence to let her family home in south London.
A brief excitement swept through Westminster this afternoon when No 10 said emails between the chancellor’s husband and the letting agent had “come to light”. They had not been published when this newsletter went out, but the lettings agency said it had apologised to Reeves for an “oversight” in not applying for a licence.
But Angela Rayner is no longer deputy prime minister after making a “mistake” in which she “acted with integrity”, according to the adviser on ministerial interests, in failing to pay the required amount of stamp duty on a property purchase.
The amounts of money involved may be similar, in that Reeves’s error may cost her not just the £945 for a licence but a year’s rent of £38,000 as well. Rayner is repaying an estimated £40,000 in additional stamp duty.
I have commented that it is hard to see the difference in principle between the two cases – and I speculate that the real difference is that Keir Starmer was content to see Rayner go but desperate to keep Reeves, an ally who is not a threat to his position, in place.
Licenses for single family residence rentals are basically automatically granted, so -in terms of scale- it's not really comparable.
Do you still think that it was reasonable for her to not know she needed a licence, because you didn't know whether you needed one?
You weren't campaigning for selective landlord licensing in Jan 2023 were you?
Oh come on @BlancheLivermore, I was all for calling for Rayner's resignation because she dodged taxes (or at the very least took actions to remain ignorant of them). That was a serious offence: it was, I believe, an act of moral turpitude, and I have a very low tolerence for that.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to decieve or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
I haven't mentioned Rayner or sackings or anything except the simple question I asked you
You last night said something along the lines of how was she supposed to know she needed a licence, I had to check if I needed one
Do you stand by that assessment, or do you concede that, having campaigned for these licences, she obviously knew that she might well need one?
It's a nice example of being hoist by her own petard
It was a joke on @Foxy saying Andrew was being sent to Coventry. Which, for the avoidance of doubt, is not in Norfolk
"Sent to Coventry" is an old English idiom:
"To send one to Coventry; a punishment inflicted by officers of the army on such of their brethren as are testy, or have been guilty of improper behaviour, not worthy the cognizance of a court martial. The person sent to Coventry is considered as absent; no one must speak to or answer any question he asks, except relative to duty, under penalty of being also sent to the same place. On a proper submission, the penitent is recalled, and welcomed by the mess, as just returned from a journey to Coventry.[4]"
Bizarrely, it would appear from the Buckingham Palace statement that Prince Andrew remains eighth in line to the throne and a Counsellor of State. So, legally he could still stand in for King Charles, if necessary
As @patrickkmaguire and I reported in our book, Angela Rayner wanted to use Charles's coronation to revise legislation and remove Prince Andrew as a councillor of state. She felt she could not justify perpetuating "that nonce's" role in public life or the royal pecking order.
Can't change succession without agreement of all 15 Commonwealth Realms, or the monarchy can split.
Which Commonwealth realm is desperate to keep Andrew in the line of Succession? The Gulf States still like him and the business they did with him when he was a UK trade envoy but they are not Commonwealth realms
Rachel Reeves is still chancellor after making an “inadvertent mistake” in failing to apply for a licence to let her family home in south London.
A brief excitement swept through Westminster this afternoon when No 10 said emails between the chancellor’s husband and the letting agent had “come to light”. They had not been published when this newsletter went out, but the lettings agency said it had apologised to Reeves for an “oversight” in not applying for a licence.
But Angela Rayner is no longer deputy prime minister after making a “mistake” in which she “acted with integrity”, according to the adviser on ministerial interests, in failing to pay the required amount of stamp duty on a property purchase.
The amounts of money involved may be similar, in that Reeves’s error may cost her not just the £945 for a licence but a year’s rent of £38,000 as well. Rayner is repaying an estimated £40,000 in additional stamp duty.
I have commented that it is hard to see the difference in principle between the two cases – and I speculate that the real difference is that Keir Starmer was content to see Rayner go but desperate to keep Reeves, an ally who is not a threat to his position, in place.
Licenses for single family residence rentals are basically automatically granted, so -in terms of scale- it's not really comparable.
Do you still think that it was reasonable for her to not know she needed a licence, because you didn't know whether you needed one?
You weren't campaigning for selective landlord licensing in Jan 2023 were you?
Oh come on @BlancheLivermore, I was all for calling for Rayner's resignation because she dodged taxes (or at the very least took actions to remain ignorant of them). That was a serious offence: it was, I believe, an act of moral turpitude, and I have a very low tolerence for that.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to decieve or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
Reading between the lines, there was a bit more going on at that letting agency than they are admitting.
People don’t ‘suddenly resign’ without handover meetings unless there is something suboptimal in the background.
Under such circumstances it is very normal for such errors to occur - and people not want to talk about it.
I assume the agent in question was sacked and walked out the door immediately
Rachel Reeves is still chancellor after making an “inadvertent mistake” in failing to apply for a licence to let her family home in south London.
A brief excitement swept through Westminster this afternoon when No 10 said emails between the chancellor’s husband and the letting agent had “come to light”. They had not been published when this newsletter went out, but the lettings agency said it had apologised to Reeves for an “oversight” in not applying for a licence.
But Angela Rayner is no longer deputy prime minister after making a “mistake” in which she “acted with integrity”, according to the adviser on ministerial interests, in failing to pay the required amount of stamp duty on a property purchase.
The amounts of money involved may be similar, in that Reeves’s error may cost her not just the £945 for a licence but a year’s rent of £38,000 as well. Rayner is repaying an estimated £40,000 in additional stamp duty.
I have commented that it is hard to see the difference in principle between the two cases – and I speculate that the real difference is that Keir Starmer was content to see Rayner go but desperate to keep Reeves, an ally who is not a threat to his position, in place.
Licenses for single family residence rentals are basically automatically granted, so -in terms of scale- it's not really comparable.
Do you still think that it was reasonable for her to not know she needed a licence, because you didn't know whether you needed one?
You weren't campaigning for selective landlord licensing in Jan 2023 were you?
Oh come on @BlancheLivermore, I was all for calling for Rayner's resignation because she dodged taxes (or at the very least took actions to remain ignorant of them). That was a serious offence: it was, I believe, an act of moral turpitude, and I have a very low tolerence for that.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to decieve or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
I haven't mentioned Rayner or sackings or anything except the simple question I asked you
You last night said something along the lines of how was she supposed to know she needed a licence, I had to check if I needed one
Do you stand by that assessment, or do you concede that, having campaigned for these licences, she obviously knew that she might well need one?
Of course she knew she needed one - the estate agents told her [husband] they would do the paperwork to get her one.
Rachel Reeves is still chancellor after making an “inadvertent mistake” in failing to apply for a licence to let her family home in south London.
A brief excitement swept through Westminster this afternoon when No 10 said emails between the chancellor’s husband and the letting agent had “come to light”. They had not been published when this newsletter went out, but the lettings agency said it had apologised to Reeves for an “oversight” in not applying for a licence.
But Angela Rayner is no longer deputy prime minister after making a “mistake” in which she “acted with integrity”, according to the adviser on ministerial interests, in failing to pay the required amount of stamp duty on a property purchase.
The amounts of money involved may be similar, in that Reeves’s error may cost her not just the £945 for a licence but a year’s rent of £38,000 as well. Rayner is repaying an estimated £40,000 in additional stamp duty.
I have commented that it is hard to see the difference in principle between the two cases – and I speculate that the real difference is that Keir Starmer was content to see Rayner go but desperate to keep Reeves, an ally who is not a threat to his position, in place.
Licenses for single family residence rentals are basically automatically granted, so -in terms of scale- it's not really comparable.
Do you still think that it was reasonable for her to not know she needed a licence, because you didn't know whether you needed one?
You weren't campaigning for selective landlord licensing in Jan 2023 were you?
Oh come on @BlancheLivermore, I was all for calling for Rayner's resignation because she dodged taxes (or at the very least took actions to remain ignorant of them). That was a serious offence: it was, I believe, an act of moral turpitude, and I have a very low tolerence for that.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to decieve or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
I haven't mentioned Rayner or sackings or anything except the simple question I asked you
You last night said something along the lines of how was she supposed to know she needed a licence, I had to check if I needed one
Do you stand by that assessment, or do you concede that, having campaigned for these licences, she obviously knew that she might well need one?
Oh, my first posting on this was completely wrong: I assumed that she -like me- had no idea.
Rachel Reeves is still chancellor after making an “inadvertent mistake” in failing to apply for a licence to let her family home in south London.
A brief excitement swept through Westminster this afternoon when No 10 said emails between the chancellor’s husband and the letting agent had “come to light”. They had not been published when this newsletter went out, but the lettings agency said it had apologised to Reeves for an “oversight” in not applying for a licence.
But Angela Rayner is no longer deputy prime minister after making a “mistake” in which she “acted with integrity”, according to the adviser on ministerial interests, in failing to pay the required amount of stamp duty on a property purchase.
The amounts of money involved may be similar, in that Reeves’s error may cost her not just the £945 for a licence but a year’s rent of £38,000 as well. Rayner is repaying an estimated £40,000 in additional stamp duty.
I have commented that it is hard to see the difference in principle between the two cases – and I speculate that the real difference is that Keir Starmer was content to see Rayner go but desperate to keep Reeves, an ally who is not a threat to his position, in place.
Licenses for single family residence rentals are basically automatically granted, so -in terms of scale- it's not really comparable.
Do you still think that it was reasonable for her to not know she needed a licence, because you didn't know whether you needed one?
You weren't campaigning for selective landlord licensing in Jan 2023 were you?
Oh come on @BlancheLivermore, I was all for calling for Rayner's resignation because she dodged taxes (or at the very least took actions to remain ignorant of them). That was a serious offence: it was, I believe, an act of moral turpitude, and I have a very low tolerence for that.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to decieve or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
Reading between the lines, there was a bit more going on at that letting agency than they are admitting.
People don’t ‘suddenly resign’ without handover meetings unless there is something suboptimal in the background.
Under such circumstances it is very normal for such errors to occur - and people not want to talk about it.
I assume the agent in question was sacked and walked out the door immediately
It would be funny if he was fired for agreeing to arrange the licence for free
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
It was a joke on @Foxy saying Andrew was being sent to Coventry. Which, for the avoidance of doubt, is not in Norfolk
"Sent to Coventry" is an old English idiom:
"To send one to Coventry; a punishment inflicted by officers of the army on such of their brethren as are testy, or have been guilty of improper behaviour, not worthy the cognizance of a court martial. The person sent to Coventry is considered as absent; no one must speak to or answer any question he asks, except relative to duty, under penalty of being also sent to the same place. On a proper submission, the penitent is recalled, and welcomed by the mess, as just returned from a journey to Coventry.[4]"
Bizarrely, it would appear from the Buckingham Palace statement that Prince Andrew remains eighth in line to the throne and a Counsellor of State. So, legally he could still stand in for King Charles, if necessary
As @patrickkmaguire and I reported in our book, Angela Rayner wanted to use Charles's coronation to revise legislation and remove Prince Andrew as a councillor of state. She felt she could not justify perpetuating "that nonce's" role in public life or the royal pecking order.
Can't change succession without agreement of all 15 Commonwealth Realms, or the monarchy can split.
Which Commonwealth realm is desperate to keep Andrew in the line of Succession? The Gulf States still like him and the business they did with him when he was a UK trade envoy but they are not Commonwealth realms
Quite, assuming the formal process to remove titles requires legislation, which it probably will, then it can include a clause to disbar him from succession. As was the case when male preference primogeniture was replaced with absolute primogeniture before Prince George was born, most of the commonwealth realms were content that UK law amended their own constitutional settlement and were content with the changes being waved through.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
The problem with Edinburgh is that, because it's so nice in so many ways, there are too many tourists. When I lived there I always felt that I was having to wade through tourists every time I was in the centre, and so the city felt a bit like a museum exhibit, or a large National Trust property, rather than a living city.
But I don't particularly like Glasgow. The urban motorway is such an ugly scar running through it.
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Kim hasn't done so for quite a while. Neither has Putin.
Have we got any atolls to blow up or have we given them away? I don't think Australia would be keen any more.
Rachel Reeves is still chancellor after making an “inadvertent mistake” in failing to apply for a licence to let her family home in south London.
A brief excitement swept through Westminster this afternoon when No 10 said emails between the chancellor’s husband and the letting agent had “come to light”. They had not been published when this newsletter went out, but the lettings agency said it had apologised to Reeves for an “oversight” in not applying for a licence.
But Angela Rayner is no longer deputy prime minister after making a “mistake” in which she “acted with integrity”, according to the adviser on ministerial interests, in failing to pay the required amount of stamp duty on a property purchase.
The amounts of money involved may be similar, in that Reeves’s error may cost her not just the £945 for a licence but a year’s rent of £38,000 as well. Rayner is repaying an estimated £40,000 in additional stamp duty.
I have commented that it is hard to see the difference in principle between the two cases – and I speculate that the real difference is that Keir Starmer was content to see Rayner go but desperate to keep Reeves, an ally who is not a threat to his position, in place.
Licenses for single family residence rentals are basically automatically granted, so -in terms of scale- it's not really comparable.
Do you still think that it was reasonable for her to not know she needed a licence, because you didn't know whether you needed one?
You weren't campaigning for selective landlord licensing in Jan 2023 were you?
Oh come on @BlancheLivermore, I was all for calling for Rayner's resignation because she dodged taxes (or at the very least took actions to remain ignorant of them). That was a serious offence: it was, I believe, an act of moral turpitude, and I have a very low tolerence for that.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to decieve or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
I haven't mentioned Rayner or sackings or anything except the simple question I asked you
You last night said something along the lines of how was she supposed to know she needed a licence, I had to check if I needed one
Do you stand by that assessment, or do you concede that, having campaigned for these licences, she obviously knew that she might well need one?
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
We only stayed for a few hours before moving on to the Trossachs. Which was lovely. But we're back in Glasgow now: we're stopping overnight here on our way back home: we've done lunch at the Willow Tea Rooms - which was perfect - an open top bus tour - corny, but always fun, and a good way of seeing the city - a bit of shopping - is there a better shopping street in the country than Buchanan Street? - tea at a Greek restaurant called Halloumi, which is the tastiest Greek food I've had outside Greece, and now the wife and daughters have gone back to the hotel to watch Traitors and I have gone to the Bon Accord. Which is its own slice of heaven. I have given the family the choice of Byers Road/Ashton Lane or the Necropolis tomorrow - both of which they have seen from the bus tour - and to my surprise they plumped unanimously for the Necropolis.
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Kim hasn't done so for quite a while. Neither has Putin.
Have we got any atolls to blow up or have we given them away? I don't think Australia would be keen any more.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
We only stayed for a few hours before moving on to the Trossachs. Which was lovely. But we're back in Glasgow now: we're stopping overnight here on our way back home: we've done lunch at the Willow Tea Rooms - which was perfect - an open top bus tour - corny, but always fun, and a good way of seeing the city - a bit of shopping - is there a better shopping street in the country than Buchanan Street? - tea at a Greek restaurant called Halloumi, which is the tastiest Greek food I've had outside Greece, and now the wife and daughters have gone back to the hotel to watch Traitors and I have gone to the Bon Accord. Which is its own slice of heaven. I have given the family the choice of Byers Road/Ashton Lane or the Necropolis tomorrow - both of which they have seen from the bus tour - and to my surprise they plumped unanimously for the Necropolis.
That's why the Lord built Glasgow. To give us in Edinburgh and Lothian a rain shadow.
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Kim hasn't done so for quite a while. Neither has Putin.
Have we got any atolls to blow up or have we given them away? I don't think Australia would be keen any more.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
We only stayed for a few hours before moving on to the Trossachs. Which was lovely. But we're back in Glasgow now: we're stopping overnight here on our way back home: we've done lunch at the Willow Tea Rooms - which was perfect - an open top bus tour - corny, but always fun, and a good way of seeing the city - a bit of shopping - is there a better shopping street in the country than Buchanan Street? - tea at a Greek restaurant called Halloumi, which is the tastiest Greek food I've had outside Greece, and now the wife and daughters have gone back to the hotel to watch Traitors and I have gone to the Bon Accord. Which is its own slice of heaven. I have given the family the choice of Byers Road/Ashton Lane or the Necropolis tomorrow - both of which they have seen from the bus tour - and to my surprise they plumped unanimously for the Necropolis.
Great choice on Halloumi - never had a bad meal there!
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Kim hasn't done so for quite a while. Neither has Putin.
Have we got any atolls to blow up or have we given them away? I don't think Australia would be keen any more.
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Naive, IMO. No one apart from N Korea has conducted weapons tests in decades.
The US has a large advantage in simulation, and would essentially be throwing that away if they normalised live bomb tests.
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Kim hasn't done so for quite a while. Neither has Putin.
Have we got any atolls to blow up or have we given them away? I don't think Australia would be keen any more.
Plenty of room in the Atlantic ocean for a missile test
Those aren't nuclear warhead tests. Just delivery systems, which could for all one knows be carrying the Epping Conservative flyers.
They are all capable of carrying nuclear missiles and being tested regularly, it is time we did the same
But the report and the discussion is about warhead testing. Something very different, not least in being restricted under treaty (at least until recently).
In your line of argument, testing my smoke detector would be a nuclear test ...
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Naive, IMO. No one apart from N Korea has conducted weapons tests in decades.
The US has a large advantage in simulation, and would essentially be throwing that away if they normalised live bomb tests.
Not naive, the naivety is from left liberals who would let Putin and Kim and Xi walk all over them and do test after test of nuclear warhead capable missiles without response
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
We only stayed for a few hours before moving on to the Trossachs. Which was lovely. But we're back in Glasgow now: we're stopping overnight here on our way back home: we've done lunch at the Willow Tea Rooms - which was perfect - an open top bus tour - corny, but always fun, and a good way of seeing the city - a bit of shopping - is there a better shopping street in the country than Buchanan Street? - tea at a Greek restaurant called Halloumi, which is the tastiest Greek food I've had outside Greece, and now the wife and daughters have gone back to the hotel to watch Traitors and I have gone to the Bon Accord. Which is its own slice of heaven. I have given the family the choice of Byers Road/Ashton Lane or the Necropolis tomorrow - both of which they have seen from the bus tour - and to my surprise they plumped unanimously for the Necropolis.
One of the big aims of all this was to give Scotiaphile daughter #1 an urban alternative to Edinburgh (which up until now is where she saw her future). Pleased to report she is feeling very positive about it.
I wonder if the Bon Accord is any connection to the team which famously lost 36-0 to Arbroath?
Final observation: Glasgow clearly has its own flag war going on. In the working class inner northern suburbs, a striking number of Scottish flags are being flown from lampposts; in the middle class inner north western suburbs an equally striking number of half-n-half Scottish/Palestinian flags are being flown. It feels like the primary aim of each lot is to annoy the other. It's nice to be a semi-outsider in this and be able to take an amusedly detached view.
In why Reform will put Labour to the sword in May latest...
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h People ask "How could Reeves not notice that £900 hadn't gone from her account?" That sounds like a question from organised people who run their bank accounts tightly. Personally I'd have no idea if a bill I'd believed I'd paid hadn't gone out.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 50m She's Chancellor & her husband is a senior civil servant, plus she got rental income on her house. They probably gets north of £20k per month passing through a joint bank account. £900 will be easy to miss.
Bizarrely, it would appear from the Buckingham Palace statement that Prince Andrew remains eighth in line to the throne and a Counsellor of State. So, legally he could still stand in for King Charles, if necessary
As @patrickkmaguire and I reported in our book, Angela Rayner wanted to use Charles's coronation to revise legislation and remove Prince Andrew as a councillor of state. She felt she could not justify perpetuating "that nonce's" role in public life or the royal pecking order.
Can't change succession without agreement of all 15 Commonwealth Realms, or the monarchy can split.
Which Commonwealth realm is desperate to keep Andrew in the line of Succession? The Gulf States still like him and the business they did with him when he was a UK trade envoy but they are not Commonwealth realms
Quite, assuming the formal process to remove titles requires legislation, which it probably will, then it can include a clause to disbar him from succession. As was the case when male preference primogeniture was replaced with absolute primogeniture before Prince George was born, most of the commonwealth realms were content that UK law amended their own constitutional settlement and were content with the changes being waved through.
No, they had to pass their own acts in their own parliaments.
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Kim hasn't done so for quite a while. Neither has Putin.
Have we got any atolls to blow up or have we given them away? I don't think Australia would be keen any more.
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Naive, IMO. No one apart from N Korea has conducted weapons tests in decades.
The US has a large advantage in simulation, and would essentially be throwing that away if they normalised live bomb tests.
Not naive, the naivety is from left liberals who would let Putin and Kim and Xi walk all over them and do test after test of nuclear warhead capable missiles without response
Pretty decisive action by the King, albeit following the polling.
The core motive is to protect the Monarchy, even if that means sending his own brother to Coventry.
Who do we get as the BBC commentator for major royal events now?
Once the statement was finished, these men then “spurned the said hatchments with their feet out of the quire.” They proceeded to kick Buckingham’s arms and achievements down the full length of the nave, out of the west door and into the ditch beyond. As they were thus expelled, Buckingham was considered fully degraded from the Order of the Garter.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
I've known quite a few folk who claim Glasgow has more merit than Edinburgh. They appeared to be in possession of their senses and weren't registered blind or under the influence, so maybe there is something in their opinion but, really, truthfully, there is no comparison.
It's equivalent to saying Sunderland is superior to Newcastle. You can argue the case but, honestly...
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
The problem with Edinburgh is that, because it's so nice in so many ways, there are too many tourists. When I lived there I always felt that I was having to wade through tourists every time I was in the centre, and so the city felt a bit like a museum exhibit, or a large National Trust property, rather than a living city.
But I don't particularly like Glasgow. The urban motorway is such an ugly scar running through it.
The other problem with Edinburgh is that because it is so nice, and there are so many tourists, it is so very expensive. My contention is that you could have a much nicer quality of life in Glasgow given the amount you have to pay outin Edinburgh in housing costs. But I'd put both in my top five cities, along with Newcastle, Manchester and Sheffield. And if I'm honest Manchester only makes the cut for reasons personal to me: friends, family and the powerful (very, in my case) emotional pull of home.
The M8 isn't ideal, granted. But I'm 50 yards from it right now and it's not impacting me at all. I havemixed feelings about urban motorways. Where I livein Manchester, I can hear the M60 most of the time. Which is bad. It separates me from my nearest patch of green space - there are crossings, but they are unpleasant. I fantasise sometimes about a world in which it wasn't there. But it is so very very convenient...
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Naive, IMO. No one apart from N Korea has conducted weapons tests in decades.
The US has a large advantage in simulation, and would essentially be throwing that away if they normalised live bomb tests.
Not naive, the naivety is from left liberals who would let Putin and Kim and Xi walk all over them and do test after test of nuclear warhead capable missiles without response
Missiles are tested all the time. Remember the Trident fail?
The way this was worded suggests the actual warheads would be tested - which would be a new escalation.
Rachel Reeves is still chancellor after making an “inadvertent mistake” in failing to apply for a licence to let her family home in south London.
A brief excitement swept through Westminster this afternoon when No 10 said emails between the chancellor’s husband and the letting agent had “come to light”. They had not been published when this newsletter went out, but the lettings agency said it had apologised to Reeves for an “oversight” in not applying for a licence.
But Angela Rayner is no longer deputy prime minister after making a “mistake” in which she “acted with integrity”, according to the adviser on ministerial interests, in failing to pay the required amount of stamp duty on a property purchase.
The amounts of money involved may be similar, in that Reeves’s error may cost her not just the £945 for a licence but a year’s rent of £38,000 as well. Rayner is repaying an estimated £40,000 in additional stamp duty.
I have commented that it is hard to see the difference in principle between the two cases – and I speculate that the real difference is that Keir Starmer was content to see Rayner go but desperate to keep Reeves, an ally who is not a threat to his position, in place.
Licenses for single family residence rentals are basically automatically granted, so -in terms of scale- it's not really comparable.
Do you still think that it was reasonable for her to not know she needed a licence, because you didn't know whether you needed one?
You weren't campaigning for selective landlord licensing in Jan 2023 were you?
Oh come on @BlancheLivermore, I was all for calling for Rayner's resignation because she dodged taxes (or at the very least took actions to remain ignorant of them). That was a serious offence: it was, I believe, an act of moral turpitude, and I have a very low tolerence for that.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to decieve or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
I haven't mentioned Rayner or sackings or anything except the simple question I asked you
You last night said something along the lines of how was she supposed to know she needed a licence, I had to check if I needed one
Do you stand by that assessment, or do you concede that, having campaigned for these licences, she obviously knew that she might well need one?
Oh, my first posting on this was completely wrong: I assumed that she -like me- had no idea.
That's the argument I've been making all day
The initial analysis of many here, that there was no way she could have been expected to know, was horseshit
Yet many clung to their horseshit, and then tried to fling it at me in a moment of childish, triumphant exultation, when Reeves was "cleared"
They still all have horseshit on their hands while they clap themselves
I feel entirely vindicated by Reeves's new story: that she did know, but the Estate Agents fucked up
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
He’s normalising bad behaviour.
Just like his pending invasion of Venezuela is designed to normalise Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Bet you he calls it a “special military operation” as well…
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Naive, IMO. No one apart from N Korea has conducted weapons tests in decades.
The US has a large advantage in simulation, and would essentially be throwing that away if they normalised live bomb tests.
Not naive, the naivety is from left liberals who would let Putin and Kim and Xi walk all over them and do test after test of nuclear warhead capable missiles without response
Missiles are tested all the time. Remember the Trident fail?
The way this was worded suggests the actual warheads would be tested - which would be a new escalation.
Though yes, if you do a test keep it secret and only publicise it if successful.
We haven't tested even a nuclear warhead capable missile for years as far as I am aware
It was a joke on @Foxy saying Andrew was being sent to Coventry. Which, for the avoidance of doubt, is not in Norfolk
"Sent to Coventry" is an old English idiom:
"To send one to Coventry; a punishment inflicted by officers of the army on such of their brethren as are testy, or have been guilty of improper behaviour, not worthy the cognizance of a court martial. The person sent to Coventry is considered as absent; no one must speak to or answer any question he asks, except relative to duty, under penalty of being also sent to the same place. On a proper submission, the penitent is recalled, and welcomed by the mess, as just returned from a journey to Coventry.[4]"
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Naive, IMO. No one apart from N Korea has conducted weapons tests in decades.
The US has a large advantage in simulation, and would essentially be throwing that away if they normalised live bomb tests.
Not naive, the naivety is from left liberals who would let Putin and Kim and Xi walk all over them and do test after test of nuclear warhead capable missiles without response
Missiles are tested all the time. Remember the Trident fail?
The way this was worded suggests the actual warheads would be tested - which would be a new escalation.
Though yes, if you do a test keep it secret and only publicise it if successful.
We haven't tested even a nuclear warhead capable missile for years as far as I am aware
Reeves seems to be very fortunate with the spin going forwards that the letting agent is apologising for the mistake, which seems to me to be her own damned fault.
A very different spin can be put on the exact same words.
"In an effort to be helpful our previous property manager offered to apply for a licence on these clients' behalf, as shown in the correspondence.
"That property manager suddenly resigned on the Friday before the tenancy began on the following Monday.
"Unfortunately, the lack of application was not picked up by us as we do not normally apply for licences on behalf of our clients; the onus is on them to apply. We have apologised to the owners for this oversight. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2p55ejy88o
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
He’s normalising bad behaviour.
Just like his pending invasion of Venezuela is designed to normalise Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Bet you he calls it a “special military operation” as well…
Rachel Reeves is still chancellor after making an “inadvertent mistake” in failing to apply for a licence to let her family home in south London.
A brief excitement swept through Westminster this afternoon when No 10 said emails between the chancellor’s husband and the letting agent had “come to light”. They had not been published when this newsletter went out, but the lettings agency said it had apologised to Reeves for an “oversight” in not applying for a licence.
But Angela Rayner is no longer deputy prime minister after making a “mistake” in which she “acted with integrity”, according to the adviser on ministerial interests, in failing to pay the required amount of stamp duty on a property purchase.
The amounts of money involved may be similar, in that Reeves’s error may cost her not just the £945 for a licence but a year’s rent of £38,000 as well. Rayner is repaying an estimated £40,000 in additional stamp duty.
I have commented that it is hard to see the difference in principle between the two cases – and I speculate that the real difference is that Keir Starmer was content to see Rayner go but desperate to keep Reeves, an ally who is not a threat to his position, in place.
Licenses for single family residence rentals are basically automatically granted, so -in terms of scale- it's not really comparable.
Do you still think that it was reasonable for her to not know she needed a licence, because you didn't know whether you needed one?
You weren't campaigning for selective landlord licensing in Jan 2023 were you?
Oh come on @BlancheLivermore, I was all for calling for Rayner's resignation because she dodged taxes (or at the very least took actions to remain ignorant of them). That was a serious offence: it was, I believe, an act of moral turpitude, and I have a very low tolerance for that.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to deceive or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
I haven't mentioned Rayner or sackings or anything except the simple question I asked you
You last night said something along the lines of how was she supposed to know she needed a licence, I had to check if I needed one
Do you stand by that assessment, or do you concede that, having campaigned for these licences, she obviously knew that she might well need one?
Didn't have you down as a box ticking sort.
I don't think I am. I do make sure all the boxes that I deliver are properly scanned, photographed and in the right place
But I don't make people who I like sign for parcels if they're out, when I can put them somewhere safe. We're not allowed to do that, but I ignore the rule about ten times a day. All the customers are grateful for that, and nobody has yet pretended that they didn't receive the parcel
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
He’s normalising bad behaviour.
Just like his pending invasion of Venezuela is designed to normalise Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Bet you he calls it a “special military operation” as well…
Agreed - Putin is a dangerous fool.
But the nuclear powered cruise missile they tested has little or no practical purpose; the US ditched their prototype well over half a century back.
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Naive, IMO. No one apart from N Korea has conducted weapons tests in decades.
The US has a large advantage in simulation, and would essentially be throwing that away if they normalised live bomb tests.
Not naive, the naivety is from left liberals who would let Putin and Kim and Xi walk all over them and do test after test of nuclear warhead capable missiles without response
Missiles are tested all the time. Remember the Trident fail?
The way this was worded suggests the actual warheads would be tested - which would be a new escalation.
Though yes, if you do a test keep it secret and only publicise it if successful.
We haven't tested even a nuclear warhead capable missile for years as far as I am aware
In why Reform will put Labour to the sword in May latest...
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h People ask "How could Reeves not notice that £900 hadn't gone from her account?" That sounds like a question from organised people who run their bank accounts tightly. Personally I'd have no idea if a bill I'd believed I'd paid hadn't gone out.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 50m She's Chancellor & her husband is a senior civil servant, plus she got rental income on her house. They probably gets north of £20k per month passing through a joint bank account. £900 will be easy to miss.
On the other hand, it does highlight the gap between the upper upper middle class (not even the mega elite) and the rest.
On the other hand, there's that hilarious gap between Reform's leadership and followership.
(That's already too many hands. Ed.)
On the other hand (Oh, I give up. Ed.), remember the expenses scandal? It may have started as a partisan thing, but it ended up hurting all of politics. A lot of MPs have houses they rent out...
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Naive, IMO. No one apart from N Korea has conducted weapons tests in decades.
The US has a large advantage in simulation, and would essentially be throwing that away if they normalised live bomb tests.
Not naive, the naivety is from left liberals who would let Putin and Kim and Xi walk all over them and do test after test of nuclear warhead capable missiles without response
Missiles are tested all the time. Remember the Trident fail?
The way this was worded suggests the actual warheads would be tested - which would be a new escalation.
Though yes, if you do a test keep it secret and only publicise it if successful.
We haven't tested even a nuclear warhead capable missile for years as far as I am aware
1) how do you keep a ballistic missile test secret? The thing is flying halfway round the world and pinging out into space. The warhead tests can be picked up in the same way we do earthquakes 2) we had a failed test quite recently
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
I've known quite a few folk who claim Glasgow has more merit than Edinburgh. They appeared to be in possession of their senses and weren't registered blind or under the influence, so maybe there is something in their opinion but, really, truthfully, there is no comparison.
It's equivalent to saying Sunderland is superior to Newcastle. You can argue the case but, honestly...
No, I cautiously stand by it, for this primary reason: living costs are a material consideration of how nice a life you could have. And you could live rather sumptiously in one of Glasgow's better suburbs for the price of somewhere either cramped or inconvenient in Edinburgh. I would never attempt to argue the merits of Sunderland over Newcastle, even taking into account coat of living. But once you get over a threshold of "I could live here and feel I was having a good life" - which I think Glasgow offers - I think the living costs over Edinburgh give it the edge. Edinburgh is more beautiful - and drier, certainly. But is that enough? Maybe I am naturally predisposed to prefer places in the west...
Their half of the deposit: £31,000 Whilst saving up for a deposit, they rented together for nine years in a rented two-bedroom flat in north London that cost £2,145 a month. The couple have a six-figure combined salary from George’s job in visual effects and Megan’s as a copywriter. She also managed to save a scholarship grant she was given for her master’s degree in Canada, worth about £9,000, by working while she studied, so she put this towards their deposit too.
Their parent's half of the deposit: £31,000 And they had help from their families, which accounted for roughly half their deposit of about 10 per cent on a £620,000 split-level two-bedroom flat.
Summary I am sympathetic to them, but if I was in a couple with a six-figure combined salary, it would not have taken me nine years to save up £32,000. Plus the Bank of Mum and Dad provided £32,000.
I’m glad you and your family are enjoying your visit to Glasgow, @Cookie, and sorry we couldn’t have provided better weather. I hope you are enjoying one of my favourite pubs. Ales or malts? If you are looking for somewhere to eat or drink after visiting the Necropolis, and are ok with craft, as opposed to real, ales, Drygate Brewery is nearby. https://www.drygate.com/
Bon Accord is the Aberdeen city motto, and that’s where the team that played Arbroath came from.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
The problem with Edinburgh is that, because it's so nice in so many ways, there are too many tourists. When I lived there I always felt that I was having to wade through tourists every time I was in the centre, and so the city felt a bit like a museum exhibit, or a large National Trust property, rather than a living city.
But I don't particularly like Glasgow. The urban motorway is such an ugly scar running through it.
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
Kim hasn't done so for quite a while. Neither has Putin.
Have we got any atolls to blow up or have we given them away? I don't think Australia would be keen any more.
Plenty of room in the Atlantic ocean for a missile test
Those aren't nuclear warhead tests. Just delivery systems, which could for all one knows be carrying the Epping Conservative flyers.
They are all capable of carrying nuclear warheads and being tested regularly, it is time we did the same
Britain has an ~decadal test of the Trident missiles which in recent years has resulted in them flopping into the sea. Those aren't nuclear weapon tests. They're missile tests.
Nuclear tests are something very different. There's a Test Ban Treaty.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
The problem with Edinburgh is that, because it's so nice in so many ways, there are too many tourists. When I lived there I always felt that I was having to wade through tourists every time I was in the centre, and so the city felt a bit like a museum exhibit, or a large National Trust property, rather than a living city.
But I don't particularly like Glasgow. The urban motorway is such an ugly scar running through it.
The other problem with Edinburgh is that because it is so nice, and there are so many tourists, it is so very expensive. My contention is that you could have a much nicer quality of life in Glasgow given the amount you have to pay outin Edinburgh in housing costs. But I'd put both in my top five cities, along with Newcastle, Manchester and Sheffield. And if I'm honest Manchester only makes the cut for reasons personal to me: friends, family and the powerful (very, in my case) emotional pull of home.
The M8 isn't ideal, granted. But I'm 50 yards from it right now and it's not impacting me at all. I havemixed feelings about urban motorways. Where I livein Manchester, I can hear the M60 most of the time. Which is bad. It separates me from my nearest patch of green space - there are crossings, but they are unpleasant. I fantasise sometimes about a world in which it wasn't there. But it is so very very convenient...
There are plans to cover over the section of motorway opposite the Bon Accord and make a civic space.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
The problem with Edinburgh is that, because it's so nice in so many ways, there are too many tourists. When I lived there I always felt that I was having to wade through tourists every time I was in the centre, and so the city felt a bit like a museum exhibit, or a large National Trust property, rather than a living city.
But I don't particularly like Glasgow. The urban motorway is such an ugly scar running through it.
The other problem with Edinburgh is that because it is so nice, and there are so many tourists, it is so very expensive. My contention is that you could have a much nicer quality of life in Glasgow given the amount you have to pay outin Edinburgh in housing costs. But I'd put both in my top five cities, along with Newcastle, Manchester and Sheffield. And if I'm honest Manchester only makes the cut for reasons personal to me: friends, family and the powerful (very, in my case) emotional pull of home.
The M8 isn't ideal, granted. But I'm 50 yards from it right now and it's not impacting me at all. I havemixed feelings about urban motorways. Where I livein Manchester, I can hear the M60 most of the time. Which is bad. It separates me from my nearest patch of green space - there are crossings, but they are unpleasant. I fantasise sometimes about a world in which it wasn't there. But it is so very very convenient...
We ended up living in Edinburgh because that was the University my wife found a PhD supervisor at who she got on well with. I then started a job with a Glasgow company. It did not escape my notice that I was spending a lot of money on train fares to commute from a more expensive city to work in a less expensive city - but I was surprised that it wasn't the only person to make the journey in that direction.
Reeves seems to be very fortunate with the spin going forwards that the letting agent is apologising for the mistake, which seems to me to be her own damned fault.
A very different spin can be put on the exact same words.
"In an effort to be helpful our previous property manager offered to apply for a licence on these clients' behalf, as shown in the correspondence.
"That property manager suddenly resigned on the Friday before the tenancy began on the following Monday.
"Unfortunately, the lack of application was not picked up by us as we do not normally apply for licences on behalf of our clients; the onus is on them to apply. We have apologised to the owners for this oversight. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2p55ejy88o
I’m wondering whether the property manager that suddenly left was a Daily Mail plant. Is that a conspiracy theory too far?
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
The problem with Edinburgh is that, because it's so nice in so many ways, there are too many tourists. When I lived there I always felt that I was having to wade through tourists every time I was in the centre, and so the city felt a bit like a museum exhibit, or a large National Trust property, rather than a living city.
But I don't particularly like Glasgow. The urban motorway is such an ugly scar running through it.
The other problem with Edinburgh is that because it is so nice, and there are so many tourists, it is so very expensive. My contention is that you could have a much nicer quality of life in Glasgow given the amount you have to pay outin Edinburgh in housing costs. But I'd put both in my top five cities, along with Newcastle, Manchester and Sheffield. And if I'm honest Manchester only makes the cut for reasons personal to me: friends, family and the powerful (very, in my case) emotional pull of home.
The M8 isn't ideal, granted. But I'm 50 yards from it right now and it's not impacting me at all. I havemixed feelings about urban motorways. Where I livein Manchester, I can hear the M60 most of the time. Which is bad. It separates me from my nearest patch of green space - there are crossings, but they are unpleasant. I fantasise sometimes about a world in which it wasn't there. But it is so very very convenient...
I am also a Glasgow fan (albeit for some reason I have had mostly good weather on my visits). I recommend a visit to the Pot Still if you get time. Or if you are more Merchant City I liked Babbity Bowster last time I was there.
Reeves seems to be very fortunate with the spin going forwards that the letting agent is apologising for the mistake, which seems to me to be her own damned fault.
A very different spin can be put on the exact same words.
"In an effort to be helpful our previous property manager offered to apply for a licence on these clients' behalf, as shown in the correspondence.
"That property manager suddenly resigned on the Friday before the tenancy began on the following Monday.
"Unfortunately, the lack of application was not picked up by us as we do not normally apply for licences on behalf of our clients; the onus is on them to apply. We have apologised to the owners for this oversight. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2p55ejy88o
I’m wondering whether the property manager that suddenly left was a Daily Mail plant. Is that a conspiracy theory too far?
Rachel Reeves is still chancellor after making an “inadvertent mistake” in failing to apply for a licence to let her family home in south London.
A brief excitement swept through Westminster this afternoon when No 10 said emails between the chancellor’s husband and the letting agent had “come to light”. They had not been published when this newsletter went out, but the lettings agency said it had apologised to Reeves for an “oversight” in not applying for a licence.
But Angela Rayner is no longer deputy prime minister after making a “mistake” in which she “acted with integrity”, according to the adviser on ministerial interests, in failing to pay the required amount of stamp duty on a property purchase.
The amounts of money involved may be similar, in that Reeves’s error may cost her not just the £945 for a licence but a year’s rent of £38,000 as well. Rayner is repaying an estimated £40,000 in additional stamp duty.
I have commented that it is hard to see the difference in principle between the two cases – and I speculate that the real difference is that Keir Starmer was content to see Rayner go but desperate to keep Reeves, an ally who is not a threat to his position, in place.
Licenses for single family residence rentals are basically automatically granted, so -in terms of scale- it's not really comparable.
Do you still think that it was reasonable for her to not know she needed a licence, because you didn't know whether you needed one?
You weren't campaigning for selective landlord licensing in Jan 2023 were you?
Oh come on @BlancheLivermore, I was all for calling for Rayner's resignation because she dodged taxes (or at the very least took actions to remain ignorant of them). That was a serious offence: it was, I believe, an act of moral turpitude, and I have a very low tolerence for that.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to decieve or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
Reading between the lines, there was a bit more going on at that letting agency than they are admitting.
People don’t ‘suddenly resign’ without handover meetings unless there is something suboptimal in the background.
Under such circumstances it is very normal for such errors to occur - and people not want to talk about it.
Reeves seems to be very fortunate with the spin going forwards that the letting agent is apologising for the mistake, which seems to me to be her own damned fault.
A very different spin can be put on the exact same words.
"In an effort to be helpful our previous property manager offered to apply for a licence on these clients' behalf, as shown in the correspondence.
"That property manager suddenly resigned on the Friday before the tenancy began on the following Monday.
"Unfortunately, the lack of application was not picked up by us as we do not normally apply for licences on behalf of our clients; the onus is on them to apply. We have apologised to the owners for this oversight. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2p55ejy88o
I’m wondering whether the property manager that suddenly left was a Daily Mail plant. Is that a conspiracy theory too far?
I’m glad you and your family are enjoying your visit to Glasgow, @Cookie, and sorry we couldn’t have provided better weather. I hope you are enjoying one of my favourite pubs. Ales or malts? If you are looking for somewhere to eat or drink after visiting the Necropolis, and are ok with craft, as opposed to real, ales, Drygate Brewery is nearby. https://www.drygate.com/
Bon Accord is the Aberdeen city motto, and that’s where the team that played Arbroath came from.
Thanks Fairliered, and yes I am. I enjoy both ales and malts, but is ales that I am particularly keen on. Sadly we need to be away before lunch for two thirds of my daughters to be back for Halloween parties - but I will bear your suggestion in mind for my next visit. I'm hoping we'll be back again this time next year. And I'm happy to report my daughter is quite enticed by Glasgow University - there is a plausible future in which I am here more regularly in a few years' time.
Edit: should add, though, on weather: Monday was heartbreakingly perfect for a trip of Ben Venue, and Wednesday glorious for a trip to Stirling. We haven't been left shortchanged by Scotland in October.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
The problem with Edinburgh is that, because it's so nice in so many ways, there are too many tourists. When I lived there I always felt that I was having to wade through tourists every time I was in the centre, and so the city felt a bit like a museum exhibit, or a large National Trust property, rather than a living city.
But I don't particularly like Glasgow. The urban motorway is such an ugly scar running through it.
The other problem with Edinburgh is that because it is so nice, and there are so many tourists, it is so very expensive. My contention is that you could have a much nicer quality of life in Glasgow given the amount you have to pay outin Edinburgh in housing costs. But I'd put both in my top five cities, along with Newcastle, Manchester and Sheffield. And if I'm honest Manchester only makes the cut for reasons personal to me: friends, family and the powerful (very, in my case) emotional pull of home.
The M8 isn't ideal, granted. But I'm 50 yards from it right now and it's not impacting me at all. I havemixed feelings about urban motorways. Where I livein Manchester, I can hear the M60 most of the time. Which is bad. It separates me from my nearest patch of green space - there are crossings, but they are unpleasant. I fantasise sometimes about a world in which it wasn't there. But it is so very very convenient...
There are plans to cover over the section of motorway opposite the Bon Accord and make a civic space.
That's interesting. I believe Antwerp has done the same with great success. I have a fantasy of putting a concrete semicircle over sections of the M60 and M602 to do the same.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
I've known quite a few folk who claim Glasgow has more merit than Edinburgh. They appeared to be in possession of their senses and weren't registered blind or under the influence, so maybe there is something in their opinion but, really, truthfully, there is no comparison.
It's equivalent to saying Sunderland is superior to Newcastle. You can argue the case but, honestly...
No, I cautiously stand by it, for this primary reason: living costs are a material consideration of how nice a life you could have. And you could live rather sumptiously in one of Glasgow's better suburbs for the price of somewhere either cramped or inconvenient in Edinburgh. I would never attempt to argue the merits of Sunderland over Newcastle, even taking into account coat of living. But once you get over a threshold of "I could live here and feel I was having a good life" - which I think Glasgow offers - I think the living costs over Edinburgh give it the edge. Edinburgh is more beautiful - and drier, certainly. But is that enough? Maybe I am naturally predisposed to prefer places in the west...
Must agree to differ there. The combination of the New Town and the Old Town, the topography (Salisbury Crags, The Castle), the approach, the history, the culture: incomparable. You can spend days and days exploring Edinburgh. Possibly the most handsome city in the UK. Only London surpasses it, but then London is a genuine world city.
I just don't see how a Victorian industrial grid-planned settlement can compete, though I do quite like the west end.
I’m glad you and your family are enjoying your visit to Glasgow, @Cookie, and sorry we couldn’t have provided better weather. I hope you are enjoying one of my favourite pubs. Ales or malts? If you are looking for somewhere to eat or drink after visiting the Necropolis, and are ok with craft, as opposed to real, ales, Drygate Brewery is nearby. https://www.drygate.com/
Bon Accord is the Aberdeen city motto, and that’s where the team that played Arbroath came from.
Thanks Fairliered, and yes I am. I enjoy both ales and malts, but is ales that I am particularly keen on. Sadly we need to be away before lunch for two thirds of my daughters to be back for Halloween parties - but I will bear your suggestion in mind for my next visit. I'm hoping we'll be back again this time next year. And I'm happy to report my daughter is quite enticed by Glasgow University - there is a plausible future in which I am here more regularly in a few years' time.
Edit: should add, though, on weather: Monday was heartbreakingly perfect for a trip of Ben Venue, and Wednesday glorious for a trip to Stirling. We haven't been left shortchanged by Scotland in October.
You and your daughter will be very welcome at any time. I hope she finds a course that interests her. She could, of course, go to Strathclyde and have John Curtice as her professor!
Rachel Reeves is still chancellor after making an “inadvertent mistake” in failing to apply for a licence to let her family home in south London.
A brief excitement swept through Westminster this afternoon when No 10 said emails between the chancellor’s husband and the letting agent had “come to light”. They had not been published when this newsletter went out, but the lettings agency said it had apologised to Reeves for an “oversight” in not applying for a licence.
But Angela Rayner is no longer deputy prime minister after making a “mistake” in which she “acted with integrity”, according to the adviser on ministerial interests, in failing to pay the required amount of stamp duty on a property purchase.
The amounts of money involved may be similar, in that Reeves’s error may cost her not just the £945 for a licence but a year’s rent of £38,000 as well. Rayner is repaying an estimated £40,000 in additional stamp duty.
I have commented that it is hard to see the difference in principle between the two cases – and I speculate that the real difference is that Keir Starmer was content to see Rayner go but desperate to keep Reeves, an ally who is not a threat to his position, in place.
Licenses for single family residence rentals are basically automatically granted, so -in terms of scale- it's not really comparable.
Do you still think that it was reasonable for her to not know she needed a licence, because you didn't know whether you needed one?
You weren't campaigning for selective landlord licensing in Jan 2023 were you?
Oh come on @BlancheLivermore, I was all for calling for Rayner's resignation because she dodged taxes (or at the very least took actions to remain ignorant of them). That was a serious offence: it was, I believe, an act of moral turpitude, and I have a very low tolerence for that.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to decieve or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
Yes, I agree. It's not Rayner's dodgy expenses that were the main issue - it's that she made no bones about going after Tories for exactly the same thing.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
I've known quite a few folk who claim Glasgow has more merit than Edinburgh. They appeared to be in possession of their senses and weren't registered blind or under the influence, so maybe there is something in their opinion but, really, truthfully, there is no comparison.
It's equivalent to saying Sunderland is superior to Newcastle. You can argue the case but, honestly...
No, I cautiously stand by it, for this primary reason: living costs are a material consideration of how nice a life you could have. And you could live rather sumptiously in one of Glasgow's better suburbs for the price of somewhere either cramped or inconvenient in Edinburgh. I would never attempt to argue the merits of Sunderland over Newcastle, even taking into account coat of living. But once you get over a threshold of "I could live here and feel I was having a good life" - which I think Glasgow offers - I think the living costs over Edinburgh give it the edge. Edinburgh is more beautiful - and drier, certainly. But is that enough? Maybe I am naturally predisposed to prefer places in the west...
Must agree to differ there. The combination of the New Town and the Old Town, the topography (Salisbury Crags, The Castle), the approach, the history, the culture: incomparable. You can spend days and days exploring Edinburgh. Possibly the most handsome city in the UK. Only London surpasses it, but then London is a genuine world city.
I just don't see how a Victorian industrial grid-planned settlement can compete, though I do quite like the west end.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
The problem with Edinburgh is that, because it's so nice in so many ways, there are too many tourists. When I lived there I always felt that I was having to wade through tourists every time I was in the centre, and so the city felt a bit like a museum exhibit, or a large National Trust property, rather than a living city.
But I don't particularly like Glasgow. The urban motorway is such an ugly scar running through it.
The other problem with Edinburgh is that because it is so nice, and there are so many tourists, it is so very expensive. My contention is that you could have a much nicer quality of life in Glasgow given the amount you have to pay outin Edinburgh in housing costs. But I'd put both in my top five cities, along with Newcastle, Manchester and Sheffield. And if I'm honest Manchester only makes the cut for reasons personal to me: friends, family and the powerful (very, in my case) emotional pull of home.
The M8 isn't ideal, granted. But I'm 50 yards from it right now and it's not impacting me at all. I havemixed feelings about urban motorways. Where I livein Manchester, I can hear the M60 most of the time. Which is bad. It separates me from my nearest patch of green space - there are crossings, but they are unpleasant. I fantasise sometimes about a world in which it wasn't there. But it is so very very convenient...
It is an interesting trade off in terms of desiribility vs cost of living when comparing places to live, with potential income a third factor. Then of course sentimental and personal connection. In many ways I think the property is (in an economic sense) a perfect market. House/flat prices very much match the combination of these factors. I was in Marylebone for a family event at the weekend, my favourite bit of London, but for the price of my four bed detached in Leics I would get a one bed leasehold flat with no parking. No thanks, its not that nice.
Reeves seems to be very fortunate with the spin going forwards that the letting agent is apologising for the mistake, which seems to me to be her own damned fault.
A very different spin can be put on the exact same words.
"In an effort to be helpful our previous property manager offered to apply for a licence on these clients' behalf, as shown in the correspondence.
"That property manager suddenly resigned on the Friday before the tenancy began on the following Monday.
"Unfortunately, the lack of application was not picked up by us as we do not normally apply for licences on behalf of our clients; the onus is on them to apply. We have apologised to the owners for this oversight. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2p55ejy88o
I disagree.
If the agent had not offered to submit the application then you would be correct. But the agent did offer and therefore she is entitled to rely on them following through although she should have checked.
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Putin and Kim are already doing so, Trump is right to do so in my view, he needs to show Russia, N Korea and China it isn't just them who can show off their nuclear warheads. Starmer and Macron could also follow suit
He’s normalising bad behaviour.
Just like his pending invasion of Venezuela is designed to normalise Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Bet you he calls it a “special military operation” as well…
After my header comprehensively eviscerating the Conservative Party’s Net Zero bashing for votes, senior Conservative voices from across the party are weighing in behind me, to back my argument.
Scrapping net zero targets is an extreme and unnecessary measure, that will alienate the electorate and bring no massive leap in support for the Conservatives. In fact it will fatally undermine Britain's global leadership on climate - as well as jobs and investment generated by the transition.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
I've known quite a few folk who claim Glasgow has more merit than Edinburgh. They appeared to be in possession of their senses and weren't registered blind or under the influence, so maybe there is something in their opinion but, really, truthfully, there is no comparison.
It's equivalent to saying Sunderland is superior to Newcastle. You can argue the case but, honestly...
No, I cautiously stand by it, for this primary reason: living costs are a material consideration of how nice a life you could have. And you could live rather sumptiously in one of Glasgow's better suburbs for the price of somewhere either cramped or inconvenient in Edinburgh. I would never attempt to argue the merits of Sunderland over Newcastle, even taking into account coat of living. But once you get over a threshold of "I could live here and feel I was having a good life" - which I think Glasgow offers - I think the living costs over Edinburgh give it the edge. Edinburgh is more beautiful - and drier, certainly. But is that enough? Maybe I am naturally predisposed to prefer places in the west...
Must agree to differ there. The combination of the New Town and the Old Town, the topography (Salisbury Crags, The Castle), the approach, the history, the culture: incomparable. You can spend days and days exploring Edinburgh. Possibly the most handsome city in the UK. Only London surpasses it, but then London is a genuine world city.
I just don't see how a Victorian industrial grid-planned settlement can compete, though I do quite like the west end.
My point is: if you were to offer me the choice of identically-sized four-bed semis on Morningside or Hillhead - well yes, I might plump for Morningside. (Though sitting in Glasgow saying that I feel awfully disloyal.) But that wouldn't be the choice, I don't think? (I haven't checked). It would be handsome four-bed semi in Hillhead or two-bed flat in Morningside/handsome four bed semi in inconvenient location with bad schools in Edinburgh. And in that eventuality, Glasgow would win. But I can absolutely understand the position of those who put up with less comfort or convenience in Edinburgh due to living costs for the benefit of living in one of the most beautiful cities in Europe.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
The problem with Edinburgh is that, because it's so nice in so many ways, there are too many tourists. When I lived there I always felt that I was having to wade through tourists every time I was in the centre, and so the city felt a bit like a museum exhibit, or a large National Trust property, rather than a living city.
But I don't particularly like Glasgow. The urban motorway is such an ugly scar running through it.
The other problem with Edinburgh is that because it is so nice, and there are so many tourists, it is so very expensive. My contention is that you could have a much nicer quality of life in Glasgow given the amount you have to pay outin Edinburgh in housing costs. But I'd put both in my top five cities, along with Newcastle, Manchester and Sheffield. And if I'm honest Manchester only makes the cut for reasons personal to me: friends, family and the powerful (very, in my case) emotional pull of home.
The M8 isn't ideal, granted. But I'm 50 yards from it right now and it's not impacting me at all. I havemixed feelings about urban motorways. Where I livein Manchester, I can hear the M60 most of the time. Which is bad. It separates me from my nearest patch of green space - there are crossings, but they are unpleasant. I fantasise sometimes about a world in which it wasn't there. But it is so very very convenient...
There are plans to cover over the section of motorway opposite the Bon Accord and make a civic space.
That's interesting. I believe Antwerp has done the same with great success. I have a fantasy of putting a concrete semicircle over sections of the M60 and M602 to do the same.
The most astonishingly ugly urban motorway is the Cahill Expressway along Circular Quay in Sydney.
After my header comprehensively eviscerating the Conservative Party’s Net Zero bashing for votes, senior Conservative voices from across the party are weighing in behind me, to back my argument.
Scrapping net zero targets is an extreme and unnecessary measure, that will alienate the electorate and bring no massive leap in support for the Conservatives. In fact it will fatally undermine Britain's global leadership on climate - as well as jobs and investment generated by the transition.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
I've known quite a few folk who claim Glasgow has more merit than Edinburgh. They appeared to be in possession of their senses and weren't registered blind or under the influence, so maybe there is something in their opinion but, really, truthfully, there is no comparison.
It's equivalent to saying Sunderland is superior to Newcastle. You can argue the case but, honestly...
No, I cautiously stand by it, for this primary reason: living costs are a material consideration of how nice a life you could have. And you could live rather sumptiously in one of Glasgow's better suburbs for the price of somewhere either cramped or inconvenient in Edinburgh. I would never attempt to argue the merits of Sunderland over Newcastle, even taking into account coat of living. But once you get over a threshold of "I could live here and feel I was having a good life" - which I think Glasgow offers - I think the living costs over Edinburgh give it the edge. Edinburgh is more beautiful - and drier, certainly. But is that enough? Maybe I am naturally predisposed to prefer places in the west...
Must agree to differ there. The combination of the New Town and the Old Town, the topography (Salisbury Crags, The Castle), the approach, the history, the culture: incomparable. You can spend days and days exploring Edinburgh. Possibly the most handsome city in the UK. Only London surpasses it, but then London is a genuine world city.
I just don't see how a Victorian industrial grid-planned settlement can compete, though I do quite like the west end.
My point is: if you were to offer me the choice of identically-sized four-bed semis on Morningside or Hillhead - well yes, I might plump for Morningside. (Though sitting in Glasgow saying that I feel awfully disloyal.) But that wouldn't be the choice, I don't think? (I haven't checked). It would be handsome four-bed semi in Hillhead or two-bed flat in Morningside/handsome four bed semi in inconvenient location with bad schools in Edinburgh. And in that eventuality, Glasgow would win. But I can absolutely understand the position of those who put up with less comfort or convenience in Edinburgh due to living costs for the benefit of living in one of the most beautiful cities in Europe.
London is a world city, but there's very little of it I'd describe as attractive or handsome and even that is being rapidly swamped by unattractive high rise office buildings
I am fed up with people calling Andrew a nonce. I have spelt out what my view of him is on here on earlier threads. It is not remotely flattering, to put it mildly.
But he has not been charged let alone convicted of anything. Nor will he be in relation to the late Ms Giuffre for obvious reasons.
And given this society's abysmal failures to deal properly or at all with actual nonces and men who have been convicted of very serious crimes - I will remind you that far too many men convicted of the possession of hundreds, thousands even of the worst category of child abuse images - each of which is evidence of a crime -avoid jail - thus leaving them entirely free to continue with their revolting harmful activities, the focus on Andrew seems to me to be displacement activity of the worst and most futile kind.
We can have lots of outrage directed at one individual while blithely ignoring our failure to do anything about the actual criminals in our midst. The inquiry about the banned subject announced several months ago will likely not even get started until next year, a year after it all kicked off and decades after many of the crimes. Many of those covered by the IICSA Reports will never receive justice and virtually all of those responsible for the crimes it covers have escaped any sort of accountability, naming or shaming. But hey shouting abuse at a stupid ex-royal - well that'll make some feel better even if it does damn all for any of the victims. And so we can feel self-righteous and good about ourselves - apparently the only metric which matters these days - while continuing to do nothing effective about the criminals or for the victims.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
I've known quite a few folk who claim Glasgow has more merit than Edinburgh. They appeared to be in possession of their senses and weren't registered blind or under the influence, so maybe there is something in their opinion but, really, truthfully, there is no comparison.
It's equivalent to saying Sunderland is superior to Newcastle. You can argue the case but, honestly...
No, I cautiously stand by it, for this primary reason: living costs are a material consideration of how nice a life you could have. And you could live rather sumptiously in one of Glasgow's better suburbs for the price of somewhere either cramped or inconvenient in Edinburgh. I would never attempt to argue the merits of Sunderland over Newcastle, even taking into account coat of living. But once you get over a threshold of "I could live here and feel I was having a good life" - which I think Glasgow offers - I think the living costs over Edinburgh give it the edge. Edinburgh is more beautiful - and drier, certainly. But is that enough? Maybe I am naturally predisposed to prefer places in the west...
Must agree to differ there. The combination of the New Town and the Old Town, the topography (Salisbury Crags, The Castle), the approach, the history, the culture: incomparable. You can spend days and days exploring Edinburgh. Possibly the most handsome city in the UK. Only London surpasses it, but then London is a genuine world city.
I just don't see how a Victorian industrial grid-planned settlement can compete, though I do quite like the west end.
My point is: if you were to offer me the choice of identically-sized four-bed semis on Morningside or Hillhead - well yes, I might plump for Morningside. (Though sitting in Glasgow saying that I feel awfully disloyal.) But that wouldn't be the choice, I don't think? (I haven't checked). It would be handsome four-bed semi in Hillhead or two-bed flat in Morningside/handsome four bed semi in inconvenient location with bad schools in Edinburgh. And in that eventuality, Glasgow would win. But I can absolutely understand the position of those who put up with less comfort or convenience in Edinburgh due to living costs for the benefit of living in one of the most beautiful cities in Europe.
London is a world city, but there's very little of it I'd describe as attractive or handsome and even that is being rapidly swamped by unattractive high rise office buildings
Kensington and Chelsea, Hampstead, Richmond upon Thames, Westminster, plenty of handsome, attractive and even beautiful buildings around there
Reeves was aware she needed a licence, but never paid for one
Whatever the estate agent has said, it remains the landlord's responsibility
A diligent person would have double-checked
The Chancellor ought to be the epitome of diligence
I never called for her to lose her job, and never really expected her to
I strongly contested, and continue to contest, the ludicrous notion the she could somehow be unaware of a policy that she had been campaigning in favour of for over eighteen months, before it affected her personally
Oh dear. Thoughts are with you at this difficult time.
Evening pb. Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again:
Posters may remember I was planning a trip to Glasgow. A full review to follow in due course. But in the meantime, the most Glaswegian image of the day from the adjacent table in the Willow Tea Rooms: Charles Rennie MacKintosh with Irn Bru.
Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections: I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close. Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country. [cont in a minute...]
The problem with Edinburgh is that, because it's so nice in so many ways, there are too many tourists. When I lived there I always felt that I was having to wade through tourists every time I was in the centre, and so the city felt a bit like a museum exhibit, or a large National Trust property, rather than a living city.
But I don't particularly like Glasgow. The urban motorway is such an ugly scar running through it.
The other problem with Edinburgh is that because it is so nice, and there are so many tourists, it is so very expensive. My contention is that you could have a much nicer quality of life in Glasgow given the amount you have to pay outin Edinburgh in housing costs. But I'd put both in my top five cities, along with Newcastle, Manchester and Sheffield. And if I'm honest Manchester only makes the cut for reasons personal to me: friends, family and the powerful (very, in my case) emotional pull of home.
The M8 isn't ideal, granted. But I'm 50 yards from it right now and it's not impacting me at all. I havemixed feelings about urban motorways. Where I livein Manchester, I can hear the M60 most of the time. Which is bad. It separates me from my nearest patch of green space - there are crossings, but they are unpleasant. I fantasise sometimes about a world in which it wasn't there. But it is so very very convenient...
It is an interesting trade off in terms of desiribility vs cost of living when comparing places to live, with potential income a third factor. Then of course sentimental and personal connection. In many ways I think the property is (in an economic sense) a perfect market. House/flat prices very much match the combination of these factors. I was in Marylebone for a family event at the weekend, my favourite bit of London, but for the price of my four bed detached in Leics I would get a one bed leasehold flat with no parking. No thanks, its not that nice.
The question of 'where would I choose to live given living costs' is far more interesting than tbe question of 'where would I choose to live'. For me, the answer is Manchester, but Manchester's position is artificially elevated by the considerations of friends, family and the emotional pull of the part of the world I grew up in. Without that, Manchester would still rank high - but other places would probably eclipse it: Glasgow, Edinburgh, Newcastle, the Lake District, North Yorkshire, Sheffield. It's a perfect market - but also, we don't all value the same things. I value handsome vibrant cities and access to high hills. Others might value walkable market towns, or small villages, or endless car-accessible urban sprawl ( @BartholomewRoberts ). It leads to fascinating discussions.
Comments
The key swing voters though are those who went for Boris in 2019, voted for Starmer last year and are now backing Farage. Unless Labour can get massive tactical votes from the LDs and Greens in marginal Labour held seats to beat Reform (the Greens will be mainly contenders in inner city seats Reform would not be contenders anyway)
Bizarrely, it would appear from the Buckingham Palace statement that Prince Andrew remains eighth in line to the throne and a Counsellor of State. So, legally he could still stand in for King Charles, if necessary
@Gabriel_Pogrund
As @patrickkmaguire and I reported in our book, Angela Rayner wanted to use Charles's coronation to revise legislation and remove Prince Andrew as a councillor of state. She felt she could not justify perpetuating "that nonce's" role in public life or the royal pecking order.
The last time a son inherited the title Duke of York from his father was in 1402.
And the last time the title passed by inheritance was in 1415 when the 2nd Duke died at Agincourt and his nephew inherited it.
Ever since then the title has been under forfeit, failed for lack of male heirs or merged with the Crown when the holder became King.
"To send one to Coventry; a punishment inflicted by officers of the army on such of their brethren as are testy, or have been guilty of improper behaviour, not worthy the cognizance of a court martial. The person sent to Coventry is considered as absent; no one must speak to or answer any question he asks, except relative to duty, under penalty of being also sent to the same place. On a proper submission, the penitent is recalled, and welcomed by the mess, as just returned from a journey to Coventry.[4]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Send_to_Coventry
It used to be used quite widely by Trades Unionists, and indeed in my schooldays in Warwickshire.
In this case, she asked her agents to secure a license, and that didn't happen. Now, should she have checked? Yes. But there's no moral turpitude involved, no attempt to decieve or to obtain pecuniary advantage.
So, sure, she should have been more organized. But I wouldn't be bashing a Conservative or Reform MP for such a minor infraction, and therefore to remain consistent, I shouldn't criticize her either.
‘We took out a £554,000 mega mortgage — we had no choice’
https://www.thetimes.com/article/c8ce33ae-c537-4b32-b097-b94d64f3e3c1?shareToken=d5a6c2986fc6d33755efca543d881901
You last night said something along the lines of how was she supposed to know she needed a licence, I had to check if I needed one
Do you stand by that assessment, or do you concede that, having campaigned for these licences, she obviously knew that she might well need one?
People don’t ‘suddenly resign’ without handover meetings unless there is something suboptimal in the background.
Under such circumstances it is very normal for such errors to occur - and people not want to talk about it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gzq2p0yk4o
I'm sure it won't encourage other states to do the same.
Point #1: Due, I can only imagine, to my utter ineptitude, I have managed to post on two successive dead threads: ordinarily I would let this sort of thing slide, but I really enjoyed the photo - so with apologies, I will try again: Point #2: For the possible interest of @Theuniondivvie , @malcolmg, @Carnyx , @Fairliered and others who kindly supplied ideas for my trip north, some reflections:
I really, really like Glasgow. My adored Morningside grandmother - for whom Glasgow was number 1 in a long, long list of things of which she disapproved - may turn in her grave at me saying this, but it may be my favourite British city. Edinburgh may be more beautiful, but to this Mancunian, Glasgow feels like a city should feel, only better. I'm struggling to put my finger on exactly why. Glasgow is bloody handsome, or course, but nit as beautiful as Edinburgh. Glasgow's things-to-do quotient is high - its tourist offer, its pubs, its restaurants - but again, surely Edinburgh can easily match it? It does, to this Mancunian, feel like a city should - the right size, the right buzziness, the slight edge - is it just that I am slightly suspicious of things being too nice? I think what it comes down to is the feeling that if you lived here you could have a really nice life. And to be young here must be - if not heaven itself, pretty close.
Of course, you'd have to not mind the weather. I know people who have moved to Manchester because they couldn't cope with the rain in Glasgow any longer.
With thanks for everyone's suggestions, I have managed only a small handful. We stopped on the way to Aberfoyle and had lunch at the Griffin in that dead zone between tge city centre and the West End - the pub looked no better than miderately charming, but the food was amazing - then walked down to the Kelvingrove museum, which was brilliant - exactly what a museum should be and only a minimum of self-flagellation about the empire and climate change (compared to its counterpart in Manchester at least). Then, just as we were leaving, an organ recital! Yer actual toccata and fugue like a horror movie of old. And as we left, the sun came out, and the skyline of the university building: one of my favourite urban views in the country.
[cont in a minute...]
Or maybe just concrete thinking. There's a lot of concrete in Coventry.
But I don't particularly like Glasgow. The urban motorway is such an ugly scar running through it.
Have we got any atolls to blow up or have we given them away? I don't think Australia would be keen any more.
I have given the family the choice of Byers Road/Ashton Lane or the Necropolis tomorrow - both of which they have seen from the bus tour - and to my surprise they plumped unanimously for the Necropolis.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/29/world/europe/russia-missile-poseidon-putin-nuclear-tests.html
https://www.nknews.org/2025/10/north-korea-tests-cruise-missiles-to-show-nuke-capabilities-to-enemies-kcna/
Plenty of room in the Atlantic ocean for a missile test
Excellent that your hol has gone so well.
No one apart from N Korea has conducted weapons tests in decades.
The US has a large advantage in simulation, and would essentially be throwing that away if they normalised live bomb tests.
In your line of argument, testing my smoke detector would be a nuclear test ...
I wonder if the Bon Accord is any connection to the team which famously lost 36-0 to Arbroath?
Final observation: Glasgow clearly has its own flag war going on. In the working class inner northern suburbs, a striking number of Scottish flags are being flown from lampposts; in the middle class inner north western suburbs an equally striking number of half-n-half Scottish/Palestinian flags are being flown. It feels like the primary aim of each lot is to annoy the other. It's nice to be a semi-outsider in this and be able to take an amusedly detached view.
Andrew Lilico
@andrew_lilico
·
1h
People ask "How could Reeves not notice that £900 hadn't gone from her account?" That sounds like a question from organised people who run their bank accounts tightly. Personally I'd have no idea if a bill I'd believed I'd paid hadn't gone out.
Andrew Lilico
@andrew_lilico
·
50m
She's Chancellor & her husband is a senior civil servant, plus she got rental income on her house. They probably gets north of £20k per month passing through a joint bank account. £900 will be easy to miss.
https://x.com/andrew_lilico/status/1983985870438068362
We test missiles all the time. Not warheads.
*I mean that in an affectionate way, HY.
It's equivalent to saying Sunderland is superior to Newcastle. You can argue the case but, honestly...
The M8 isn't ideal, granted. But I'm 50 yards from it right now and it's not impacting me at all.
I havemixed feelings about urban motorways. Where I livein Manchester, I can hear the M60 most of the time. Which is bad. It separates me from my nearest patch of green space - there are crossings, but they are unpleasant. I fantasise sometimes about a world in which it wasn't there.
But it is so very very convenient...
The way this was worded suggests the actual warheads would be tested - which would be a new escalation.
The initial analysis of many here, that there was no way she could have been expected to know, was horseshit
Yet many clung to their horseshit, and then tried to fling it at me in a moment of childish, triumphant exultation, when Reeves was "cleared"
They still all have horseshit on their hands while they clap themselves
I feel entirely vindicated by Reeves's new story: that she did know, but the Estate Agents fucked up
Just like his pending invasion of Venezuela is designed to normalise Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Bet you he calls it a “special military operation” as well…
We haven't tested even a nuclear warhead capable missile for years as far as I am aware
A very different spin can be put on the exact same words.
"In an effort to be helpful our previous property manager offered to apply for a licence on these clients' behalf, as shown in the correspondence.
"That property manager suddenly resigned on the Friday before the tenancy began on the following Monday.
"Unfortunately, the lack of application was not picked up by us as we do not normally apply for licences on behalf of our clients; the onus is on them to apply. We have apologised to the owners for this oversight.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2p55ejy88o
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/29/world/europe/russia-missile-poseidon-putin-nuclear-tests.html
But I don't make people who I like sign for parcels if they're out, when I can put them somewhere safe. We're not allowed to do that, but I ignore the rule about ten times a day. All the customers are grateful for that, and nobody has yet pretended that they didn't receive the parcel
But the nuclear powered cruise missile they tested has little or no practical purpose; the US ditched their prototype well over half a century back.
On the other hand, it does highlight the gap between the upper upper middle class (not even the mega elite) and the rest.
On the other hand, there's that hilarious gap between Reform's leadership and followership.
(That's already too many hands. Ed.)
On the other hand (Oh, I give up. Ed.), remember the expenses scandal? It may have started as a partisan thing, but it ended up hurting all of politics. A lot of MPs have houses they rent out...
2) we had a failed test quite recently
I would never attempt to argue the merits of Sunderland over Newcastle, even taking into account coat of living. But once you get over a threshold of "I could live here and feel I was having a good life" - which I think Glasgow offers - I think the living costs over Edinburgh give it the edge.
Edinburgh is more beautiful - and drier, certainly. But is that enough?
Maybe I am naturally predisposed to prefer places in the west...
Whilst saving up for a deposit, they rented together for nine years in a rented two-bedroom flat in north London that cost £2,145 a month. The couple have a six-figure combined salary from George’s job in visual effects and Megan’s as a copywriter. She also managed to save a scholarship grant she was given for her master’s degree in Canada, worth about £9,000, by working while she studied, so she put this towards their deposit too.
Their parent's half of the deposit: £31,000
And they had help from their families, which accounted for roughly half their deposit of about 10 per cent on a £620,000 split-level two-bedroom flat.
Summary
I am sympathetic to them, but if I was in a couple with a six-figure combined salary, it would not have taken me nine years to save up £32,000. Plus the Bank of Mum and Dad provided £32,000.
Bon Accord is the Aberdeen city motto, and that’s where the team that played Arbroath came from.
Nuclear tests are something very different. There's a Test Ban Treaty.
And I'm happy to report my daughter is quite enticed by Glasgow University - there is a plausible future in which I am here more regularly in a few years' time.
Edit: should add, though, on weather: Monday was heartbreakingly perfect for a trip of Ben Venue, and Wednesday glorious for a trip to Stirling. We haven't been left shortchanged by Scotland in October.
I have a fantasy of putting a concrete semicircle over sections of the M60 and M602 to do the same.
I just don't see how a Victorian industrial grid-planned settlement can compete, though I do quite like the west end.
If the agent had not offered to submit the application then you would be correct. But the agent did offer and therefore she is entitled to rely on them following through although she should have checked.
Far harder to maintain a strong line that it is wrong when the US does it as well. That’s what “normalisation” is.
Scrapping net zero targets is an extreme and unnecessary measure, that will alienate the electorate and bring no massive leap in support for the Conservatives. In fact it will fatally undermine Britain's global leadership on climate - as well as jobs and investment generated by the transition.
https://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnson-becomes-third-former-tory-pm-to-criticise-kemi-badenochs-policies-13460479
I - MoonRabbit - lead. The Conservative Party follows me, not Kemi.
But I can absolutely understand the position of those who put up with less comfort or convenience in Edinburgh due to living costs for the benefit of living in one of the most beautiful cities in Europe.
What were people thinking!
But so be it.
I am fed up with people calling Andrew a nonce. I have spelt out what my view of him is on here on earlier threads. It is not remotely flattering, to put it mildly.
But he has not been charged let alone convicted of anything. Nor will he be in relation to the late Ms Giuffre for obvious reasons.
And given this society's abysmal failures to deal properly or at all with actual nonces and men who have been convicted of very serious crimes - I will remind you that far too many men convicted of the possession of hundreds, thousands even of the worst category of child abuse images - each of which is evidence of a crime -avoid jail - thus leaving them entirely free to continue with their revolting harmful activities, the focus on Andrew seems to me to be displacement activity of the worst and most futile kind.
We can have lots of outrage directed at one individual while blithely ignoring our failure to do anything about the actual criminals in our midst. The inquiry about the banned subject announced several months ago will likely not even get started until next year, a year after it all kicked off and decades after many of the crimes. Many of those covered by the IICSA Reports will never receive justice and virtually all of those responsible for the crimes it covers have escaped any sort of accountability, naming or shaming. But hey shouting abuse at a stupid ex-royal - well that'll make some feel better even if it does damn all for any of the victims. And so we can feel self-righteous and good about ourselves - apparently the only metric which matters these days - while continuing to do nothing effective about the criminals or for the victims.
It's pathetic.
For me, the answer is Manchester, but Manchester's position is artificially elevated by the considerations of friends, family and the emotional pull of the part of the world I grew up in. Without that, Manchester would still rank high - but other places would probably eclipse it: Glasgow, Edinburgh, Newcastle, the Lake District, North Yorkshire, Sheffield.
It's a perfect market - but also, we don't all value the same things. I value handsome vibrant cities and access to high hills. Others might value walkable market towns, or small villages, or endless car-accessible urban sprawl ( @BartholomewRoberts ). It leads to fascinating discussions.