The union, for a vast majority of its history, has survived with Scotland being represented in Westminster only, and it has always been able to be out voted by 'England'. Except England is not represented in Westminster, constituencies are, and they all have equal weight and say.
To say Scotland is being treated like a colony is ridiculous. It has much greater autonomy and control than any area of England.
Westminster is the English parliament, whatever England wants it can vote and get it. Scotland has to beg for anything it would like and nowadays we get put in our place like a pet dog. If you think that is good for Scotland you need to take a look at yourself and get a backbone. It is no longer a union , we are a colony.
'England' does not collectively vote for anything. I elect an MP to represent Gateshead. We have just as much of a vote as Glasgow North.
Your victim complex is very tiring.
You are obviously not willing or able to understand arithmetic, feel free not to reply and save tiring yourself.
Scotland is able to out-vote Northumberland. Is Northumberland a colony?
How can Scotland out vote a region of England. Scotland does not and cannot vote anywhere in Northumberland. What a preposterously stupid question.
I wonder... Were UKIP supporters really angry with the EU as such? Or were they upset by whatever situation worried them most, and then were assured by UKIP that everything would be better once we were out of the EU? Thus casting Mr Farage in the role of the Fairy Godmother, whose magic wand (leaving the EU) would make everything come right?
Boris Johnson, under the guidance of the Evil Demon Cummings, played right into this, with his promise of 350,000,000 per week for the NHS.
Everybody knows that Mrs May has not even started to negotiate anything, far less to bring about our triumphant exit from the EU. So she is still given the benefit of the doubt.
But I have the feeling that the general complacency will not last much longer, and then all the people who thought their wishes would come trueonce they voted to leave the EU, will wake up to reality. Mr Farage and UKIP were not the answer to anybody`s problems and they never were. Mrs May and her hordes of Conservative spinners aren`t the answer either.
The Conservative Party, like UKIP before it, is gong to come down with a very loud crash.
It does not help anyone for Nicola to start an Independence campaign now when she should have called it following the negotiations
It does not help anyone for Theresa May to start a campaign for the union now when she should have done it before setting out her negotiating strategy for Brexit.
To be honest no matter what Theresa May did, you would say it is wrong
G, I am not that desperate a supporter of independence. If things were done in a fair and equitable manner , as happened many years ago then I would happily stay as it is. That is not the case and the only way I can see for Scotland to get a fair shot is wit hindependence, we will never get it from the Tories.
Malc - I actually agree with your sentiment but I do think Theresa May is different and more pragmatic. We will see how this evolves.
'Imagine there was a referendum which gave you three options for Scotland's future, which one would you choose?
Scotland becoming independent from the UK 34% Scotland remaining part of the UK, but with more devolved powers 30% Scotland remaining part of the UK, with the same devolved powers as it has now 27% Don't know 10%'
I think its important for SO to recognise that Brexit happened because if unlimited immigration allowed in by Blair.
I think Brexit won because of the financial crash and the austerity that resulted from it. That's what made immigration the huge issue that it has become.
I think Brexit won because of Black Wednesday.
Ultimately the UK is too big and too proud a nation to be in the EU but not in the Euro.
Opting out of the euro at its inception bought us 10 years but, ultimately, the UK had a choice of EU + Euro and co-leading both, or to Leave and plough its own path.
The EU simply weren't willing to do the reforms necessary to make a multi-tiered EU work in the long-term. That would have become apparent even if we'd voted to Remain.
Actually I think Black Wednesday is a good nail-in-the-coffin moment, in terms of blocking a certain path to the UK's total economic integration with Europe it thereby sealed off the possibility of political integration. And eventually half-in half-out becomes unsustainable.
But I'd even suggest it goes as far as Maastricht. It was clear then that the UK and the other members were tacking a different course. And it was pretty obvious then, wasn't it, that the UK wasn't going to try catching up with the rest later? And that the rest weren't going to wait up, that a single currency was going to require radical integration to work, up to a single chancellery?
Both UKIP (through the anti-federalist league) and the Tory eurosceptics can trace their roots back to the moves of the then EC to federalisation in the late 1980s.
Mrs C, the Scottish situation is due primarily to Labour's cack-handed devolution.
They were supported by the SNP, LibDems and Greens. But yes. Sensible people knew at the time that the reform would eventually make things a lot worse and would be extremely hard to reverse.
'Imagine there was a referendum which gave you three options for Scotland's future, which one would you choose?
Scotland becoming independent from the UK 34% Scotland remaining part of the UK, but with more devolved powers 30% Scotland remaining part of the UK, with the same devolved powers as it has now 27% Don't know 10%'
Well, we are going the right way about it. We have jettisoned Europe, Scotland's ejection is making good progress, the Irish are on a separate island so no worries there.
Now what to do with the Welsh?
King Offa, seemed to have had a reasonable plan. Some of his work is still visible and for much less than a new but obsolescent railway between London and Birmingham it should be possible to recreate the whole dyke.
It does not help anyone for Nicola to start an Independence campaign now when she should have called it following the negotiations
It does not help anyone for Theresa May to start a campaign for the union now when she should have done it before setting out her negotiating strategy for Brexit.
To be honest no matter what Theresa May did, you would say it is wrong
G, I am not that desperate a supporter of independence. If things were done in a fair and equitable manner , as happened many years ago then I would happily stay as it is. That is not the case and the only way I can see for Scotland to get a fair shot is wit hindependence, we will never get it from the Tories.
Abolish Holyrood and everything will be fair and equitable.
Blowing them all up may indeed be a significantly better option:)
I think its important for SO to recognise that Brexit happened because if unlimited immigration allowed in by Blair.
I think Brexit won because of the financial crash and the austerity that resulted from it. That's what made immigration the huge issue that it has become.
I think Brexit won because of Black Wednesday.
Ultimately the UK is too big and too proud a nation to be in the EU but not in the Euro.
Opting out of the euro at its inception bought us 10 years but, ultimately, the UK had a choice of EU + Euro and co-leading both, or to Leave and plough its own path.
The EU simply weren't willing to do the reforms necessary to make a multi-tiered EU work in the long-term. That would have become apparent even if we'd voted to Remain.
Actually I think Black Wednesday is a good nail-in-the-coffin moment, in terms of blocking a certain path to the UK's total economic integration with Europe it thereby sealed off the possibility of political integration. And eventually half-in half-out becomes unsustainable.
But I'd even suggest it goes as far as Maastricht. It was clear then that the UK and the other members were tacking a different course. And it was pretty obvious then, wasn't it, that the UK wasn't going to try catching up with the rest later? And that the rest weren't going to wait up, that a single currency was going to require radical integration to work, up to a single chancellery?
Maastricht was certainly the turning point for me, Mr. Ears. Until then I had been a supporter of the EEC and the UK's membership of it (I voted to stay in 1975). Though I was unhappy with some aspects of the policies we adopted as a result. After Maastricht I became convinced that it was in the UK's best interest (and the EU's) that we leave.
The news reports of Maastricht, even on the BBC at the time, made it very clear that what the vast bulk of European states wanted to pursue something that the vast bulk of the British public was not going to sign up for any time soon, if ever.
Claims of opt-outs being a great success don't resolve the existential issue of why you'd want to be a member of a destiny-setting club but not share the key aims of the club, or a common vision for the end-point.
I wonder... Were UKIP supporters really angry with the EU as such? Or were they upset by whatever situation worried them most, and then were assured by UKIP that everything would be better once we were out of the EU? Thus casting Mr Farage in the role of the Fairy Godmother, whose magic wand (leaving the EU) would make everything come right?
Boris Johnson, under the guidance of the Evil Demon Cummings, played right into this, with his promise of 350,000,000 per week for the NHS.
Everybody knows that Mrs May has not even started to negotiate anything, far less to bring about our triumphant exit from the EU. So she is still given the benefit of the doubt.
But I have the feeling that the general complacency will not last much longer, and then all the people who thought their wishes would come trueonce they voted to leave the EU, will wake up to reality. Mr Farage and UKIP were not the answer to anybody`s problems and they never were. Mrs May and her hordes of Conservative spinners aren`t the answer either.
The Conservative Party, like UKIP before it, is gong to come down with a very loud crash.
Just my opinion, of course.
UKIP have melted away and the nasty party will get the plaudits or is that brickbats for the looming disaster.
'Imagine there was a referendum which gave you three options for Scotland's future, which one would you choose?
Scotland becoming independent from the UK 34% Scotland remaining part of the UK, but with more devolved powers 30% Scotland remaining part of the UK, with the same devolved powers as it has now 27% Don't know 10%'
The union, for a vast majority of its history, has survived with Scotland being represented in Westminster only, and it has always been able to be out voted by 'England'. Except England is not represented in Westminster, constituencies are, and they all have equal weight and say.
To say Scotland is being treated like a colony is ridiculous. It has much greater autonomy and control than any area of England.
Westminster is the English parliament, whatever England wants it can vote and get it. Scotland has to beg for anything it would like and nowadays we get put in our place like a pet dog. If you think that is good for Scotland you need to take a look at yourself and get a backbone. It is no longer a union , we are a colony.
'England' does not collectively vote for anything. I elect an MP to represent Gateshead. We have just as much of a vote as Glasgow North.
Your victim complex is very tiring.
You are obviously not willing or able to understand arithmetic, feel free not to reply and save tiring yourself.
Scotland is able to out-vote Northumberland. Is Northumberland a colony?
How can Scotland out vote a region of England. Scotland does not and cannot vote anywhere in Northumberland. What a preposterously stupid question.
It was a good question. You called Westminster the English parliament. Why not call it the parliament of Britain minus Northumberland and then substitute "Northumberland" for "Scotland" in what you said, to get
"whatever Britain without Northumberland wants it can vote and get it. Northumberland has to beg for anything it would like and nowadays we get put in our place like a pet dog. If you think that is good for Northumberland you need to take a look at yourself and get a backbone. It is no longer a union , we are a colony."
'Imagine there was a referendum which gave you three options for Scotland's future, which one would you choose?
Scotland becoming independent from the UK 34% Scotland remaining part of the UK, but with more devolved powers 30% Scotland remaining part of the UK, with the same devolved powers as it has now 27% Don't know 10%'
I wonder... Were UKIP supporters really angry with the EU as such? Or were they upset by whatever situation worried them most, and then were assured by UKIP that everything would be better once we were out of the EU? Thus casting Mr Farage in the role of the Fairy Godmother, whose magic wand (leaving the EU) would make everything come right?
Boris Johnson, under the guidance of the Evil Demon Cummings, played right into this, with his promise of 350,000,000 per week for the NHS.
Everybody knows that Mrs May has not even started to negotiate anything, far less to bring about our triumphant exit from the EU. So she is still given the benefit of the doubt.
But I have the feeling that the general complacency will not last much longer, and then all the people who thought their wishes would come trueonce they voted to leave the EU, will wake up to reality. Mr Farage and UKIP were not the answer to anybody`s problems and they never were. Mrs May and her hordes of Conservative spinners aren`t the answer either.
The Conservative Party, like UKIP before it, is gong to come down with a very loud crash.
Just my opinion, of course.
the nasty party will get the plaudits or is that brickbats for the looming disaster.
The news reports of Maastricht, even on the BBC at the time, made it very clear that what the vast bulk of European states wanted to pursue something that the vast bulk of the British public was not going to sign up for any time soon, if ever.
Claims of opt-outs being a great success don't resolve the existential issue of why you'd want to be a member of a destiny-setting club but not share the key aims of the club, or a common vision for the end-point.
Maastricht was controversial almost everywhere, and John Major's opt-outs, particularly on the Euro, were primarily a means of managing divisions in his own party.
I agree that it was an important fork in the road in terms of political discourse because it legitimised the notion that there was something negative about opting in.
Mrs C, the Scottish situation is due primarily to Labour's cack-handed devolution. The establishment of Holyrood was determined by a Scottish vote, the composition of the current Scottish Parliament by a Scottish election.
It takes an unorthodox and creative application of logic to blame that on the English.
I am very good at unorthodoxness and creativity, but the blame here is the lassaiz-faire approach to national politics over several decades. From the Troubles in NI, house burning in Wales, grumbles from Cornwall and English regions and the rising nationalism in Scotland from the 70s onwards, it has been clear that a comprehensive reform of UK politics has been needed for a long time.
What we have got over the years is a series of sticking-plaster solutions usually based on gerrymandering with Labour's Scottish Devo being one of the finest examples of the whole thing. Even now, we are just coasting along.
I am thoroughly annoyed at seeing what I regarded as one of the world's finest countries disintegrate. Then we have "Biff" doing his sideshow in Washington whilst his backers fill their financial boots with govt contracts, the EU looking distinctly wobbly and we have made sure that the Middle East is really unstable.
I think its important for SO to recognise that Brexit happened because if unlimited immigration allowed in by Blair.
I think Brexit won because of the financial crash and the austerity that resulted from it. That's what made immigration the huge issue that it has become.
Brown was shouting "British Jobs For British Workers" in September 2007.
Immigration was already having an effect upon working class Labour supporters before the recession.
While home ownership had been falling from 2004 onwards.
None of these things tend to happen before a recession after a long period of economic growth - there must have been other factors causing them.
There were clear effects of immigration on working class communities before the recession and this could be seen as a political consequence in the local elections of 2007 and 2008. Hence Brown's "British Jobs For British Workers".
Well, we are going the right way about it. We have jettisoned Europe, Scotland's ejection is making good progress, the Irish are on a separate island so no worries there.
Now what to do with the Welsh?
King Offa, seemed to have had a reasonable plan. Some of his work is still visible and for much less than a new but obsolescent railway between London and Birmingham it should be possible to recreate the whole dyke.
Maybe PB can persuade a bookies to run a bet - who rebuilds Offa's Dyke? The English or the Welsh?
The union, for a vast majority of its history, has survived with Scotland being represented in Westminster only, and it has always been able to be out voted by 'England'. Except England is not represented in Westminster, constituencies are, and they all have equal weight and say.
To say Scotland is being treated like a colony is ridiculous. It has much greater autonomy and control than any area of England.
Westminster is the English parliament, whatever England wants it can vote and get it. Scotland has to beg for anything it would like and nowadays we get put in our place like a pet dog. If you think that is good for Scotland you need to take a look at yourself and get a backbone. It is no longer a union , we are a colony.
'England' does not collectively vote for anything. I elect an MP to represent Gateshead. We have just as much of a vote as Glasgow North.
Your victim complex is very tiring.
You are obviously not willing or able to understand arithmetic, feel free not to reply and save tiring yourself.
Scotland is able to out-vote Northumberland. Is Northumberland a colony?
How can Scotland out vote a region of England. Scotland does not and cannot vote anywhere in Northumberland. What a preposterously stupid question.
It was a good question. You called Westminster the English parliament. Why not call it the parliament of Britain minus Northumberland and then substitute "Northumberland" for "Scotland" in what you said, to get
"whatever Britain without Northumberland wants it can vote and get it. Northumberland has to beg for anything it would like and nowadays we get put in our place like a pet dog. If you think that is good for Northumberland you need to take a look at yourself and get a backbone. It is no longer a union , we are a colony."
?
I did not expect that you would understand the difference between a country and a region
The union, for a vast majority of its history, has survived with Scotland being represented in Westminster only, and it has always been able to be out voted by 'England'. Except England is not represented in Westminster, constituencies are, and they all have equal weight and say.
To say Scotland is being treated like a colony is ridiculous. It has much greater autonomy and control than any area of England.
Westminster is the English parliament, whatever England wants it can vote and get it. Scotland has to beg for anything it would like and nowadays we get put in our place like a pet dog. If you think that is good for Scotland you need to take a look at yourself and get a backbone. It is no longer a union , we are a colony.
'England' does not collectively vote for anything. I elect an MP to represent Gateshead. We have just as much of a vote as Glasgow North.
Your victim complex is very tiring.
You are obviously not willing or able to understand arithmetic, feel free not to reply and save tiring yourself.
Scotland is able to out-vote Northumberland. Is Northumberland a colony?
How can Scotland out vote a region of England. Scotland does not and cannot vote anywhere in Northumberland. What a preposterously stupid question.
Good job those SNP piss heads err mp's don't vote on English only matters - oh
I wonder... Were UKIP supporters really angry with the EU as such? Or were they upset by whatever situation worried them most, and then were assured by UKIP that everything would be better once we were out of the EU? Thus casting Mr Farage in the role of the Fairy Godmother, whose magic wand (leaving the EU) would make everything come right?
Boris Johnson, under the guidance of the Evil Demon Cummings, played right into this, with his promise of 350,000,000 per week for the NHS.
Everybody knows that Mrs May has not even started to negotiate anything, far less to bring about our triumphant exit from the EU. So she is still given the benefit of the doubt.
But I have the feeling that the general complacency will not last much longer, and then all the people who thought their wishes would come trueonce they voted to leave the EU, will wake up to reality. Mr Farage and UKIP were not the answer to anybody`s problems and they never were. Mrs May and her hordes of Conservative spinners aren`t the answer either.
The Conservative Party, like UKIP before it, is gong to come down with a very loud crash.
Just my opinion, of course.
the nasty party will get the plaudits or is that brickbats for the looming disaster.
Banging on about winnng indyref2 again?
New Instructions arrived from across the water Toom, panic still the order of the day.
The union, for a vast majority of its history, has survived with Scotland being represented in Westminster only, and it has always been able to be out voted by 'England'. Except England is not represented in Westminster, constituencies are, and they all have equal weight and say.
To say Scotland is being treated like a colony is ridiculous. It has much greater autonomy and control than any area of England.
Westminster is the English parliament, whatever England wants it can vote and get it. Scotland has to beg for anything it would like and nowadays we get put in our place like a pet dog. If you think that is good for Scotland you need to take a look at yourself and get a backbone. It is no longer a union , we are a colony.
'England' does not collectively vote for anything. I elect an MP to represent Gateshead. We have just as much of a vote as Glasgow North.
Your victim complex is very tiring.
You are obviously not willing or able to understand arithmetic, feel free not to reply and save tiring yourself.
Scotland is able to out-vote Northumberland. Is Northumberland a colony?
How can Scotland out vote a region of England. Scotland does not and cannot vote anywhere in Northumberland. What a preposterously stupid question.
Good job those SNP piss heads err mp's don't vote on English only matters - oh
Name one thing they have voted on that was English only and did not have an impact on Scotland sunshine. Stick to playing with your toy soldiers rather than trying to show how bad a comedienne you are.
It does not help anyone for Nicola to start an Independence campaign now when she should have called it following the negotiations
It does not help anyone for Theresa May to start a campaign for the union now when she should have done it before setting out her negotiating strategy for Brexit.
To be honest no matter what Theresa May did, you would say it is wrong
Not true.
If she said the EU superstate was an ideal solution for Britain and we were going for full on integration and to that end we were joining the Euro.
Well, we are going the right way about it. We have jettisoned Europe, Scotland's ejection is making good progress, the Irish are on a separate island so no worries there.
Now what to do with the Welsh?
King Offa, seemed to have had a reasonable plan. Some of his work is still visible and for much less than a new but obsolescent railway between London and Birmingham it should be possible to recreate the whole dyke.
Maybe PB can persuade a bookies to run a bet - who rebuilds Offa's Dyke? The English or the Welsh?
Far more Scots vote in Westminster elections than in Holyrood ones.
Given that fact, it is very insulting to Scottish people to call Westminster the "English parliament".
They keep hoping they can keep the Tories out but to no avail. For Holyrood there is only on eparty that you could vote for, the regional sub office parties are not worth voting for.
Well, we are going the right way about it. We have jettisoned Europe, Scotland's ejection is making good progress, the Irish are on a separate island so no worries there.
Now what to do with the Welsh?
King Offa, seemed to have had a reasonable plan. Some of his work is still visible and for much less than a new but obsolescent railway between London and Birmingham it should be possible to recreate the whole dyke.
Maybe PB can persuade a bookies to run a bet - who rebuilds Offa's Dyke? The English or the Welsh?
Who pays for it is more pertinent
Most pertinent of all, will the Poles who build it enjoy full labour rights?
Well, we are going the right way about it. We have jettisoned Europe, Scotland's ejection is making good progress, the Irish are on a separate island so no worries there.
Now what to do with the Welsh?
King Offa, seemed to have had a reasonable plan. Some of his work is still visible and for much less than a new but obsolescent railway between London and Birmingham it should be possible to recreate the whole dyke.
Maybe PB can persuade a bookies to run a bet - who rebuilds Offa's Dyke? The English or the Welsh?
Who pays for it is more pertinent
That is twice I have agreed with you today (the other point of agreement was on the usefulness of Gordon Brown's "contribution")
I think its important for SO to recognise that Brexit happened because if unlimited immigration allowed in by Blair.
I think Brexit won because of the financial crash and the austerity that resulted from it. That's what made immigration the huge issue that it has become.
I think Brexit won because of Black Wednesday.
Ultimately the UK is too big and too proud a nation to be in the EU but not in the Euro.
Opting out of the euro at its inception bought us 10 years but, ultimately, the UK had a choice of EU + Euro and co-leading both, or to Leave and plough its own path.
The EU simply weren't willing to do the reforms necessary to make a multi-tiered EU work in the long-term. That would have become apparent even if we'd voted to Remain.
Actually I think Black Wednesday is a good nail-in-the-coffin moment, in terms of blocking a certain path to the UK's total economic integration with Europe it thereby sealed off the possibility of political integration. And eventually half-in half-out becomes unsustainable.
But I'd even suggest it goes as far as Maastricht. It was clear then that the UK and the other members were tacking a different course. And it was pretty obvious then, wasn't it, that the UK wasn't going to try catching up with the rest later? And that the rest weren't going to wait up, that a single currency was going to require radical integration to work, up to a single chancellery?
Maastricht was certainly the turning point for me, Mr. Ears. Until then I had been a supporter of the EEC and the UK's membership of it (I voted to stay in 1975). Though I was unhappy with some aspects of the policies we adopted as a result. After Maastricht I became convinced that it was in the UK's best interest (and the EU's) that we leave.
The news reports of Maastricht, even on the BBC at the time, made it very clear that what the vast bulk of European states wanted to pursue something that the vast bulk of the British public was not going to sign up for any time soon, if ever.
Claims of opt-outs being a great success don't resolve the existential issue of why you'd want to be a member of a destiny-setting club but not share the key aims of the club, or a common vision for the end-point.
Maastricht made clear that the EU despised democracy.
Something reinforced by the ignoring of referenda in France, Ireland and the Netherlands.
Well, we are going the right way about it. We have jettisoned Europe, Scotland's ejection is making good progress, the Irish are on a separate island so no worries there.
Now what to do with the Welsh?
King Offa, seemed to have had a reasonable plan. Some of his work is still visible and for much less than a new but obsolescent railway between London and Birmingham it should be possible to recreate the whole dyke.
Maybe PB can persuade a bookies to run a bet - who rebuilds Offa's Dyke? The English or the Welsh?
Who pays for it is more pertinent
That is twice I have agreed with you today (the other point of agreement was on the usefulness of Gordon Brown's "contribution")
'Imagine there was a referendum which gave you three options for Scotland's future, which one would you choose?
Scotland becoming independent from the UK 34% Scotland remaining part of the UK, but with more devolved powers 30% Scotland remaining part of the UK, with the same devolved powers as it has now 27% Don't know 10%'
I think its important for SO to recognise that Brexit happened because if unlimited immigration allowed in by Blair.
I think Brexit won because of the financial crash and the austerity that resulted from it. That's what made immigration the huge issue that it has become.
Brown was shouting "British Jobs For British Workers" in September 2007.
Immigration was already having an effect upon working class Labour supporters before the recession.
While home ownership had been falling from 2004 onwards.
None of these things tend to happen before a recession after a long period of economic growth - there must have been other factors causing them.
There were clear effects of immigration on working class communities before the recession and this could be seen as a political consequence in the local elections of 2007 and 2008. Hence Brown's "British Jobs For British Workers".
Something important is missing in the debate about employment.
A friend recently made the jump from a series of bottom end jobs (classic blue collar stuff) to white collar office work of the middle class kind. It was a revelation to him - every legal rule of employment scrupulously enforced, clean & elegant offices, all the equipment required for his job available.
At this level of employment, there is a shortage of UK nationals - instead of the 50% going to university getting these jobs, employers import the equivalent of 2.1 or above from Russell Group universities to fill the gap. This is an improvement over the days when these kind of jobs went to Oxbridge + a couple of places, but......
So you have a nice clean, airy, well equipped office filled with a diverse selection of backgrounds... but who notices the missing demographics?
Apart from this world is another world. Visited only by Guardian journalists in the spirit of Sanders of the River going upcountry.... this is where most of the working population works. No-one in media bubble goes there.
Something I posted yesterday on same topic was how interesting it is that one of the main reasons being suggested for Scotland not achieving independence, is the 9%ishbudget deficit they'd face. Big in Scottish terms but not such a huge deal in UK terms.
If the Conservative and Unionist Party really, really felt like putting the Union first, it would not take a grand realignment of public spending (circa 1% of UK GDP, on the back of an envelope) to subsidise Scotland to a tune that would be equivalent to them facing a 20% budget deficit if they every took the Sindy route. That scale of bribery wouldn't just make the Union more attractive - it would make crashing out of the union almost impossible.
Such largesse could be justified from a patriotic point of view as the cost of preserving the Union. It could be justified from the social point of view, as supporting some of the least well-off, more unhealthy, shortest life-expectancy regions of Britain. And while the scale of such bribery would be tricky, if it were to be prioritised, genuinely affordable.
Is it politically plausible? If May is serious about saving the union, she isn't going to be able to do it by charming the pants off the Scots. Money would do the talking better for her.
Someone pointed out to me recently that the 9.5% deficit figure is a proportion of GDP, not of the budget itself. To reduce it by 7% to meet EU rules and normally acceptable deficit levels of 3% of GDP, it would mean an 18% reduction in the actual budget, given a total public expenditure of 40% of GDP.
PS Actually likely to be more than an 18% reduction because of the economic dislocation of independence and therefore a smaller taxbase and because there is tax to pay on government expenditure. If expenditure is reduced by a large amount, the tax take will also reduce by a non-neglible margin as well.
The news reports of Maastricht, even on the BBC at the time, made it very clear that what the vast bulk of European states wanted to pursue something that the vast bulk of the British public was not going to sign up for any time soon, if ever.
Claims of opt-outs being a great success don't resolve the existential issue of why you'd want to be a member of a destiny-setting club but not share the key aims of the club, or a common vision for the end-point.
Maastricht was controversial almost everywhere, and John Major's opt-outs, particularly on the Euro, were primarily a means of managing divisions in his own party.
I agree that it was an important fork in the road in terms of political discourse because it legitimised the notion that there was something negative about opting in.
It's not a notion there was something negative about opting in.
Something I posted yesterday on same topic was how interesting it is that one of the main reasons being suggested for Scotland not achieving independence, is the 9%ishbudget deficit they'd face. Big in Scottish terms but not such a huge deal in UK terms.
If the Conservative and Unionist Party really, really felt like putting the Union first, it would not take a grand realignment of public spending (circa 1% of UK GDP, on the back of an envelope) to subsidise Scotland to a tune that would be equivalent to them facing a 20% budget deficit if they every took the Sindy route. That scale of bribery wouldn't just make the Union more attractive - it would make crashing out of the union almost impossible.
Such largesse could be justified from a patriotic point of view as the cost of preserving the Union. It could be justified from the social point of view, as supporting some of the least well-off, more unhealthy, shortest life-expectancy regions of Britain. And while the scale of such bribery would be tricky, if it were to be prioritised, genuinely affordable.
Is it politically plausible? If May is serious about saving the union, she isn't going to be able to do it by charming the pants off the Scots. Money would do the talking better for her.
Someone pointed out to me recently that the 9.5% deficit figure is a proportion of GDP, not of the budget itself. To reduce it by 7% to meet EU rules and normally acceptable deficit levels of 3% of GDP, it would mean an 18% reduction in the actual budget, given a total public expenditure of 40% of GDP
Wasn't 9.5% roughly the same deficit from memory as the UK had back in 2010? We have taken 7 years of "austerity" bitterly opposed by the SNP and the left in order to get that down to 3% this year. Ie Scotland will needs the same austerity as what the UK under the Tories have had this decade.
Something I posted yesterday on same topic was how interesting it is that one of the main reasons being suggested for Scotland not achieving independence, is the 9%ishbudget deficit they'd face. Big in Scottish terms but not such a huge deal in UK terms.
If the Conservative and Unionist Party really, really felt like putting the Union first, it would not take a grand realignment of public spending (circa 1% of UK GDP, on the back of an envelope) to subsidise Scotland to a tune that would be equivalent to them facing a 20% budget deficit if they every took the Sindy route. That scale of bribery wouldn't just make the Union more attractive - it would make crashing out of the union almost impossible.
Such largesse could be justified from a patriotic point of view as the cost of preserving the Union. It could be justified from the social point of view, as supporting some of the least well-off, more unhealthy, shortest life-expectancy regions of Britain. And while the scale of such bribery would be tricky, if it were to be prioritised, genuinely affordable.
Is it politically plausible? If May is serious about saving the union, she isn't going to be able to do it by charming the pants off the Scots. Money would do the talking better for her.
Someone pointed out to me recently that the 9.5% deficit figure is a proportion of GDP, not of the budget itself. To reduce it by 7% to meet EU rules and normally acceptable deficit levels of 3% of GDP, it would mean an 18% reduction in the actual budget, given a total public expenditure of 40% of GDP
Wasn't 9.5% roughly the same deficit from memory as the UK had back in 2010? We have taken 7 years of "austerity" bitterly opposed by the SNP and the left in order to get that down to 3% this year. Ie Scotland will needs the same austerity as what the UK under the Tories have had this decade.
It's oil, basically. The nominal tax take is down drastically since 2014.
Something important is missing in the debate about employment.
A friend recently made the jump from a series of bottom end jobs (classic blue collar stuff) to white collar office work of the middle class kind. It was a revelation to him - every legal rule of employment scrupulously enforced, clean & elegant offices, all the equipment required for his job available.
At this level of employment, there is a shortage of UK nationals - instead of the 50% going to university getting these jobs, employers import the equivalent of 2.1 or above from Russell Group universities to fill the gap. This is an improvement over the days when these kind of jobs went to Oxbridge + a couple of places, but......
So you have a nice clean, airy, well equipped office filled with a diverse selection of backgrounds... but who notices the missing demographics?
Apart from this world is another world. Visited only by Guardian journalists in the spirit of Sanders of the River going upcountry.... this is where most of the working population works. No-one in media bubble goes there.
You don't state the industry or the nature of the job, which is a pity. However, I'd take issue with you that office jobs as such once went only to Oxbridge and Russell group graduates. Back in my day nobody from those universities would be seen dead in an ordinary office job - they went into certain of the professions or academia.
Office jobs were filled with people with a few O levels, if that. Indeed, the minimum requirement for an articled clerk to a solicitor or a pupil barrister or a trainee surveyor, or a commission in the forces, in fact just about anything was five O levels.
Well, we are going the right way about it. We have jettisoned Europe, Scotland's ejection is making good progress, the Irish are on a separate island so no worries there.
Now what to do with the Welsh?
King Offa, seemed to have had a reasonable plan. Some of his work is still visible and for much less than a new but obsolescent railway between London and Birmingham it should be possible to recreate the whole dyke.
Maybe PB can persuade a bookies to run a bet - who rebuilds Offa's Dyke? The English or the Welsh?
Or both.
Some medieval estates in Devon used to separate themselves with a bank and ditch, except both estates would build one, making a double-ditch and banks. As these followed the edges of estates, they were used by others as transport routes without trespassing, and some eventually became Devonshire sunken lanes.
'Imagine there was a referendum which gave you three options for Scotland's future, which one would you choose?
Scotland becoming independent from the UK 34% Scotland remaining part of the UK, but with more devolved powers 30% Scotland remaining part of the UK, with the same devolved powers as it has now 27% Don't know 10%'
Why isn't there a choice for abolishing Holyrood and dynamiting the Scottish Parliament Building ?
Because the people setting the questions ar enot as thick and stupid as you.
Aren't you curious to know how many Scots would like to see the costly Holyrood talking shop closed down ?
Keep up son.
Social Attitudes Survey
Independence 46% (+7) Devolution 42% (-7) Direct rule from London 8% (+2)
8% for Monica's atavists.
Social Attitudes Survey , to study Government in Scotland and largely funded by the Scottish Government and its agencies. That sounds 100% legit, for sure.
'Imagine there was a referendum which gave you three options for Scotland's future, which one would you choose?
Scotland becoming independent from the UK 34% Scotland remaining part of the UK, but with more devolved powers 30% Scotland remaining part of the UK, with the same devolved powers as it has now 27% Don't know 10%'
Well, we are going the right way about it. We have jettisoned Europe, Scotland's ejection is making good progress, the Irish are on a separate island so no worries there.
Now what to do with the Welsh?
King Offa, seemed to have had a reasonable plan. Some of his work is still visible and for much less than a new but obsolescent railway between London and Birmingham it should be possible to recreate the whole dyke.
Maybe PB can persuade a bookies to run a bet - who rebuilds Offa's Dyke? The English or the Welsh?
Or both.
Some medieval estates in Devon used to separate themselves with a bank and ditch, except both estates would build one, making a double-ditch and banks. As these followed the edges of estates, they were used by others as transport routes without trespassing, and some eventually became Devonshire sunken lanes.
I never knew that Mr. Jessup, thank you. At the risk of offending Mr. B2, the course of the roads in England has long fascinated me. There are the old Roman roads of course and some that date back to pre-iron age but others twist and meander for no obvious reason that remains today. Even one of the most modern roads, the A272 which runs East to West across Sussex and was built by French prisoners of war in the early 19th century, has remarkable twists and turns that do not seem justified by any geographical feature.
'Imagine there was a referendum which gave you three options for Scotland's future, which one would you choose?
Scotland becoming independent from the UK 34% Scotland remaining part of the UK, but with more devolved powers 30% Scotland remaining part of the UK, with the same devolved powers as it has now 27% Don't know 10%'
Why isn't there a choice for abolishing Holyrood and dynamiting the Scottish Parliament Building ?
Because the people setting the questions ar enot as thick and stupid as you.
Aren't you curious to know how many Scots would like to see the costly Holyrood talking shop closed down ?
Keep up son.
Social Attitudes Survey
Independence 46% (+7) Devolution 42% (-7) Direct rule from London 8% (+2)
8% for Monica's atavists.
Social Attitudes Survey , to study Government in Scotland and largely funded by the Scottish Government and its agencies. That sounds 100% legit, for sure.
I'm sure your scepticism was admirably consistent when the same survey was showing support for indy at half the percentage of devo.
Well, we are going the right way about it. We have jettisoned Europe, Scotland's ejection is making good progress, the Irish are on a separate island so no worries there.
Now what to do with the Welsh?
King Offa, seemed to have had a reasonable plan. Some of his work is still visible and for much less than a new but obsolescent railway between London and Birmingham it should be possible to recreate the whole dyke.
Maybe PB can persuade a bookies to run a bet - who rebuilds Offa's Dyke? The English or the Welsh?
Or both.
Some medieval estates in Devon used to separate themselves with a bank and ditch, except both estates would build one, making a double-ditch and banks. As these followed the edges of estates, they were used by others as transport routes without trespassing, and some eventually became Devonshire sunken lanes.
Cheers JJ, Just googled ‘Devonshire sunken lanes’ they look awesome. This is why I think PB would be a sadder place if non- political posts were stopped.
'Imagine there was a referendum which gave you three options for Scotland's future, which one would you choose?
Scotland becoming independent from the UK 34% Scotland remaining part of the UK, but with more devolved powers 30% Scotland remaining part of the UK, with the same devolved powers as it has now 27% Don't know 10%'
Why isn't there a choice for abolishing Holyrood and dynamiting the Scottish Parliament Building ?
Because the people setting the questions ar enot as thick and stupid as you.
Aren't you curious to know how many Scots would like to see the costly Holyrood talking shop closed down ?
Keep up son.
Social Attitudes Survey
Independence 46% (+7) Devolution 42% (-7) Direct rule from London 8% (+2)
8% for Monica's atavists.
Social Attitudes Survey , to study Government in Scotland and largely funded by the Scottish Government and its agencies. That sounds 100% legit, for sure.
I'm sure you were admirably consistent when the same survey was showing support for indy at half the percentage of devo.
Something I posted yesterday on same topic was how interesting it is that one of the main reasons being suggested for Scotland not achieving independence, is the 9%ishbudget deficit they'd face. Big in Scottish terms but not such a huge deal in UK terms.
If the Conservative and Unionist Party really, really felt like putting the Union first, it would not take a grand realignment of public spending (circa 1% of UK GDP, on the back of an envelope) to subsidise Scotland to a tune that would be equivalent to them facing a 20% budget deficit if they every took the Sindy route. That scale of bribery wouldn't just make the Union more attractive - it would make crashing out of the union almost impossible.
Such largesse could be justified from a patriotic point of view as the cost of preserving the Union. It could be justified from the social point of view, as supporting some of the least well-off, more unhealthy, shortest life-expectancy regions of Britain. And while the scale of such bribery would be tricky, if it were to be prioritised, genuinely affordable.
Is it politically plausible? If May is serious about saving the union, she isn't going to be able to do it by charming the pants off the Scots. Money would do the talking better for her.
Someone pointed out to me recently that the 9.5% deficit figure is a proportion of GDP, not of the budget itself. To reduce it by 7% to meet EU rules and normally acceptable deficit levels of 3% of GDP, it would mean an 18% reduction in the actual budget, given a total public expenditure of 40% of GDP
Wasn't 9.5% roughly the same deficit from memory as the UK had back in 2010? We have taken 7 years of "austerity" bitterly opposed by the SNP and the left in order to get that down to 3% this year. Ie Scotland will needs the same austerity as what the UK under the Tories have had this decade.
It's oil, basically. The nominal tax take is down drastically since 2014.
Irrelevant though to the question of austerity. If oil revenues aren't coming back [they're likely not] then either alternative black gold revenue is needed - or close to a decade of George Osborne style austerity.
I've not seen anyone even start to grasp this nettle.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
Well, we are going the right way about it. We have jettisoned Europe, Scotland's ejection is making good progress, the Irish are on a separate island so no worries there.
Now what to do with the Welsh?
King Offa, seemed to have had a reasonable plan. Some of his work is still visible and for much less than a new but obsolescent railway between London and Birmingham it should be possible to recreate the whole dyke.
Maybe PB can persuade a bookies to run a bet - who rebuilds Offa's Dyke? The English or the Welsh?
Or both.
Some medieval estates in Devon used to separate themselves with a bank and ditch, except both estates would build one, making a double-ditch and banks. As these followed the edges of estates, they were used by others as transport routes without trespassing, and some eventually became Devonshire sunken lanes.
Cheers JJ, Just googled ‘Devonshire sunken lanes’ they look awesome. This is why I think PB would be a sadder place if non- political posts were stopped.
As a point of fine interest, Mr. St Clare, the sunken lanes in Devonshire bear a striking resemblance to those of the bocage country in Normandy (now largely flattened by modern farming).
'Imagine there was a referendum which gave you three options for Scotland's future, which one would you choose?
Scotland becoming independent from the UK 34% Scotland remaining part of the UK, but with more devolved powers 30% Scotland remaining part of the UK, with the same devolved powers as it has now 27% Don't know 10%'
Why isn't there a choice for abolishing Holyrood and dynamiting the Scottish Parliament Building ?
Because the people setting the questions ar enot as thick and stupid as you.
Aren't you curious to know how many Scots would like to see the costly Holyrood talking shop closed down ?
Keep up son.
Social Attitudes Survey
Independence 46% (+7) Devolution 42% (-7) Direct rule from London 8% (+2)
8% for Monica's atavists.
Social Attitudes Survey , to study Government in Scotland and largely funded by the Scottish Government and its agencies. That sounds 100% legit, for sure.
I'm sure you were admirably consistent when the same survey was showing support for indy at half the percentage of devo.
Was that when SLab ran the Edinburgh eyesore ?
The Social Attitudes Survey has been going since before the Holyrood parliament was a twinkle in Miralles' eye.
It's your knowledge of Scotch politics that make your interventions so plausible.
Well, we are going the right way about it. We have jettisoned Europe, Scotland's ejection is making good progress, the Irish are on a separate island so no worries there.
Now what to do with the Welsh?
King Offa, seemed to have had a reasonable plan. Some of his work is still visible and for much less than a new but obsolescent railway between London and Birmingham it should be possible to recreate the whole dyke.
Maybe PB can persuade a bookies to run a bet - who rebuilds Offa's Dyke? The English or the Welsh?
Or both.
Some medieval estates in Devon used to separate themselves with a bank and ditch, except both estates would build one, making a double-ditch and banks. As these followed the edges of estates, they were used by others as transport routes without trespassing, and some eventually became Devonshire sunken lanes.
You want banning, son? This here is a political blogging site. We don't want no deviation.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
It's the way he tells them.
I thought his joke yesterday about Germany and him having at least something in common (being "bugged by Obama") was pretty good. He's clearly a clever bloke, just perhaps not the ideal President.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
It's the way he tells them.
I hope at some point someone in his afmin8stration will have the sense and the balls to point out Germany owes not a single cent to NATO or the US. The only argument has been over how much they spend on their own defence.
Well, we are going the right way about it. We have jettisoned Europe, Scotland's ejection is making good progress, the Irish are on a separate island so no worries there.
Now what to do with the Welsh?
King Offa, seemed to have had a reasonable plan. Some of his work is still visible and for much less than a new but obsolescent railway between London and Birmingham it should be possible to recreate the whole dyke.
Maybe PB can persuade a bookies to run a bet - who rebuilds Offa's Dyke? The English or the Welsh?
Or both.
Some medieval estates in Devon used to separate themselves with a bank and ditch, except both estates would build one, making a double-ditch and banks. As these followed the edges of estates, they were used by others as transport routes without trespassing, and some eventually became Devonshire sunken lanes.
I never knew that Mr. Jessup, thank you. At the risk of offending Mr. B2, the course of the roads in England has long fascinated me. There are the old Roman roads of course and some that date back to pre-iron age but others twist and meander for no obvious reason that remains today. Even one of the most modern roads, the A272 which runs East to West across Sussex and was built by French prisoners of war in the early 19th century, has remarkable twists and turns that do not seem justified by any geographical feature.
My dad's business was construction and demolition, and when I was knee-high to a grasshopper he said that every bend in any old road would have a reason: it might be that there was a curve in a property boundary, an old (and now dried-up) stream, a coppice to go around or even a solitary old tree.
Occasionally we'd tramp around the lanes of Derbyshire trying to work out what caused each bend. A fairly ridiculous thing to do and I bet we got few if any right, but great father-and-son bonding time.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
So that 100% commitment that May was bragging about turns out to be nothing of the sort.
It apears we are not ein volk according to this Tory.
'Bebb has written a column in his local paper arguing that Scotland is “clearly another country” and that his “gut feeling” is Scottish voters no longer see themselves as British. Fair to say these comments from a serving government minister are not in line with Theresa May’s position that “at heart we are one people”'
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
So that 100% commitment that May was bragging about turns out to be nothing of the sort.
Effectively, the US is opting out of being a super power.
It's oil, basically. The nominal tax take is down drastically since 2014.
Irrelevant though to the question of austerity. If oil revenues aren't coming back [they're likely not] then either alternative black gold revenue is needed - or close to a decade of George Osborne style austerity.
I've not seen anyone even start to grasp this nettle.
Agreed. However it is a bit more complicated. If you take 1980 as the starting point (actually the most favourable date for Scotland's case) the extra expenditure is balanced by the oil revenue. So just because the oil is running out now isn't necessarily the moment you say the model stops. Also the larger part of the difference in nominal deficits between England and Scotland is down to UK expenditure on things like social welfare and agricultural subsidies being applied at the same rates across the union. The calculation is different when Scotland is part of the Union and therefore there is a common good. and when Scotland is independent. In that case pensions etc will be lower in Scotland than England.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
Why should Germany pay the US any money ? Is that idiot/compulsive liar now deciding international law ?
Mr. Urquhart, whilst I'm sure that's accurate, it's also true that a baked potato would be better placed than Jeremy Corbyn to lead the campaign against independence. The idea that Corbyn is fit to lead anything is demented.
Mr. Urquhart, whilst I'm sure that's accurate, it's also true that a baked potato would be better placed than Jeremy Corbyn to lead the campaign against independence. The idea that Corbyn is fit to lead anything is demented.
I reckon he would do alright as the head of The Manhole Cover Enthusiast Association.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
Why should Germany pay the US any money ? Is that idiot/compulsive liar now deciding international law ?
It's just dead-cat stuff from Trump and shows that Merkel got the better of him in their discussions. I think he's also just guaranteed her reelection.
Something for everyone here, in a fascinating article on "Islamisation" and the West.
The rise in Muslim populations in Western Europe directly correlates with the rise in hard right parties. Implying that if they reach 15-20% we'll see Fascists in power.
But the author contends they will never reach that level, and he has some intriguing data, which surprised me: e.g. birthrates in Turkey and Iran are now BELOW replacement level
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
Why should Germany pay the US any money ? Is that idiot/compulsive liar now deciding international law ?
Also, Carlotta cannot hide her pleasure that Angela has been told "pay up" or else...
This brings the EU Army closer. France has nuclear weapons. So strictly speaking the EU does not need the US.
This is a clear sign the US under Trump will be an isolationist country no matter what they may say. His basic instincts are isolationist and, of course, to brazenly lie.
Something I posted yesterday on same topic was how interesting it is that one of the main reasons being suggested for Scotland not achieving independence, is the 9%ishbudget deficit they'd face. Big in Scottish terms but not such a huge deal in UK terms.
If the Conservative and Unionist Party really, really felt like putting the Union first, it would not take a grand realignment of public spending (circa 1% of UK GDP, on the back of an envelope) to subsidise Scotland to a tune that would be equivalent to them facing a 20% budget deficit if they every took the Sindy route. That scale of bribery wouldn't just make the Union more attractive - it would make crashing out of the union almost impossible.
Such largesse could be justified from a patriotic point of view as the cost of preserving the Union. It could be justified from the social point of view, as supporting some of the least well-off, more unhealthy, shortest life-expectancy regions of Britain. And while the scale of such bribery would be tricky, if it were to be prioritised, genuinely affordable.
Is it politically plausible? If May is serious about saving the union, she isn't going to be able to do it by charming the pants off the Scots. Money would do the talking better for her.
Someone pointed out to me recently that the 9.5% deficit figure is a proportion of GDP, not of the budget itself. To reduce it by 7% to meet EU rules and normally acceptable deficit levels of 3% of GDP, it would mean an 18% reduction in the actual budget, given a total public expenditure of 40% of GDP.
PS Actually likely to be more than an 18% reduction because of the economic dislocation of independence and therefore a smaller taxbase and because there is tax to pay on government expenditure. If expenditure is reduced by a large amount, the tax take will also reduce by a non-neglible margin as well.
Makes bribery all the more attractive, surely (or at least, should do for a self-appelled "Unionist" party). Scotland is sufficiently small compared to the UK as a whole, that a relatively small quantity of well-applied largesse would be almost impossible to wean off from.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
Why should Germany pay the US any money ? Is that idiot/compulsive liar now deciding international law ?
Because Germany agreed with NATO in 2006 to spend 2% of GDP on defence. Some questions of international law are reasonably straightforward, and this is one of those.
Mr. Urquhart, whilst I'm sure that's accurate, it's also true that a baked potato would be better placed than Jeremy Corbyn to lead the campaign against independence. The idea that Corbyn is fit to lead anything is demented.
I did not expect that you would understand the difference between a country and a region
You call a Scotland a "colony". So who are the settlers? Who is the governor? Where is the executive colonial administration?
And how come there is universal suffrage in Scotland in elections to the British parliament, on exactly the same basis as in every other part of Britain? That's not how they did things in Algeria or Hong Kong.
Let's not blame the Saxons who founded Edinburgh for everything.
The union, for a vast majority of its history, has survived with Scotland being represented in Westminster only, and it has always been able to be out voted by 'England'. Except England is not represented in Westminster, constituencies are, and they all have equal weight and say.
To say Scotland is being treated like a colony is ridiculous. It has much greater autonomy and control than any area of England.
Westminster is the English parliament, whatever England wants it can vote and get it. Scotland has to beg for anything it would like and nowadays we get put in our place like a pet dog. If you think that is good for Scotland you need to take a look at yourself and get a backbone. It is no longer a union , we are a colony.
'England' does not collectively vote for anything. I elect an MP to represent Gateshead. We have just as much of a vote as Glasgow North.
Your victim complex is very tiring.
You are obviously not willing or able to understand arithmetic, feel free not to reply and save tiring yourself.
Scotland is able to out-vote Northumberland. Is Northumberland a colony?
How can Scotland out vote a region of England. Scotland does not and cannot vote anywhere in Northumberland. What a preposterously stupid question.
Yes it does... in Westminster. Are you ignorant in how our political system works?
Mr. Urquhart, whilst I'm sure that's accurate, it's also true that a baked potato would be better placed than Jeremy Corbyn to lead the campaign against independence. The idea that Corbyn is fit to lead anything is demented.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
Why should Germany pay the US any money ? Is that idiot/compulsive liar now deciding international law ?
Because Germany agreed with NATO in 2006 to spend 2% of GDP on defence. Some questions of international law are reasonably straightforward, and this is one of those.
1. There was no contractual agreement. 2. Why should the US be paid ? Why not other countries too ?
A communique is not a contract. If it was, then why only Germany.
It might be better if the Yanks left Europe anyway. WE can defend ourselves.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
Why should Germany pay the US any money ? Is that idiot/compulsive liar now deciding international law ?
Because Germany agreed with NATO in 2006 to spend 2% of GDP on defence. Some questions of international law are reasonably straightforward, and this is one of those.
1. There was no contractual agreement. 2. Why should the US be paid ? Why not other countries too ?
Trump isn't actually asking Merkel to fly over with a suitcase full of euro. He's asking Germany to spend more, so there is less pressure on the US Defense* budget
(*Is it defence or defense? What's the difference? Also licence, license, practice, practise, I always get this wrong)
If you want to use the correct English spelling it is Defence. If you want to butter up the Yanks then it is with the "s".
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
Why should Germany pay the US any money ? Is that idiot/compulsive liar now deciding international law ?
Because Germany agreed with NATO in 2006 to spend 2% of GDP on defence. Some questions of international law are reasonably straightforward, and this is one of those.
1. There was no contractual agreement. 2. Why should the US be paid ? Why not other countries too ?
Trump isn't actually asking Merkel to fly over with a suitcase full of euro. He's asking Germany to spend more, so there is less pressure on the US Defense* budget
(*Is it defence or defense? What's the difference? Also licence, license, practice, practise, I always get this wrong)
In British English it's always "defence", and with "practise/practice" and "license/licence" there is the same verb/noun distinction as with "advise/advice". "Defense" is the US spelling.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
Why should Germany pay the US any money ? Is that idiot/compulsive liar now deciding international law ?
Because Germany agreed with NATO in 2006 to spend 2% of GDP on defence. Some questions of international law are reasonably straightforward, and this is one of those.
1. There was no contractual agreement. 2. Why should the US be paid ? Why not other countries too ?
I thought you said it was a sign of Trump's idiocy that he was "deciding international law", but now, puzzlingly, you seem to be at it. The arrangement of 2006 looks to me, a professional lawyer, like a contractual agreement; even if for some ballsachingly tedious reason it technically isn't, countries should still do what they have agreed to do, and it is quite in order to call on them to do so. And if balancing payments need making, they need paying to the overpaying party which is, everybody agrees, the US. Other countries do not need paying because they have not overpaid.
It apears we are not ein volk according to this Tory.
'Bebb has written a column in his local paper arguing that Scotland is “clearly another country” and that his “gut feeling” is Scottish voters no longer see themselves as British. Fair to say these comments from a serving government minister are not in line with Theresa May’s position that “at heart we are one people”'
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
Why should Germany pay the US any money ? Is that idiot/compulsive liar now deciding international law ?
Because Germany agreed with NATO in 2006 to spend 2% of GDP on defence. Some questions of international law are reasonably straightforward, and this is one of those.
1. There was no contractual agreement. 2. Why should the US be paid ? Why not other countries too ?
I thought you said it was a sign of Trump's idiocy that he was "deciding international law", but now, puzzlingly, you seem to be at it. The arrangement of 2006 looks to me, a professional lawyer, like a contractual agreement; even if for some ballsachingly tedious reason it technically isn't, countries should still do what they have agreed to do, and it is quite in order to call on them to do so. And if balancing payments need making, they need paying to the overpaying party which is, everybody agrees, the US. Other countries do not need paying because they have not overpaid.
The NATO spending obligation is designed purely to ensure that member countries are not exposing other members to unreasonable risk through the mutual defence clause. Defence begins at home.
As the only time in history that Article 5 of NATO has been invoked was in defence of the USA, they should be wary of pushing this argument too far.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
Why should Germany pay the US any money ? Is that idiot/compulsive liar now deciding international law ?
Because Germany agreed with NATO in 2006 to spend 2% of GDP on defence. Some questions of international law are reasonably straightforward, and this is one of those.
1. There was no contractual agreement. 2. Why should the US be paid ? Why not other countries too ?
A communique is not a contract. If it was, then why only Germany.
It might be better if the Yanks left Europe anyway. WE can defend ourselves.
It apears we are not ein volk according to this Tory.
'Bebb has written a column in his local paper arguing that Scotland is “clearly another country” and that his “gut feeling” is Scottish voters no longer see themselves as British. Fair to say these comments from a serving government minister are not in line with Theresa May’s position that “at heart we are one people”'
I think its important for SO to recognise that Brexit happened because if unlimited immigration allowed in by Blair.
I think Brexit won because of the financial crash and the austerity that resulted from it. That's what made immigration the huge issue that it has become.
Brown was shouting "British Jobs For British Workers" in September 2007.
Immigration was already having an effect upon working class Labour supporters before the recession.
While home ownership had been falling from 2004 onwards.
None of these things tend to happen before a recession after a long period of economic growth - there must have been other factors causing them.
There were clear effects of immigration on working class communities before the recession and this could be seen as a political consequence in the local elections of 2007 and 2008. Hence Brown's "British Jobs For British Workers".
Whilst "economic anxiety" fuels fear over immigration, the real worry for lefties like SO is what if that isn't the main reason people are against mass immigration. What if (as I suspect) the biggest reason is cultural change. In that case the left has no answer.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
Why should Germany pay the US any money ? Is that idiot/compulsive liar now deciding international law ?
Because Germany agreed with NATO in 2006 to spend 2% of GDP on defence. Some questions of international law are reasonably straightforward, and this is one of those.
1. There was no contractual agreement. 2. Why should the US be paid ? Why not other countries too ?
Trump isn't actually asking Merkel to fly over with a suitcase full of euro. He's asking Germany to spend more, so there is less pressure on the US Defense* budget
(*Is it defence or defense? What's the difference? Also licence, license, practice, practise, I always get this wrong)
In British English it's always "defence", and with "practise/practice" and "license/licence" there is the same verb/noun distinction as with "advise/advice". "Defense" is the US spelling.
Ta!
Not knowing such basic stuff, I am glad you don't make a living as a writer....oh wait.
It apears we are not ein volk according to this Tory.
'Bebb has written a column in his local paper arguing that Scotland is “clearly another country” and that his “gut feeling” is Scottish voters no longer see themselves as British. Fair to say these comments from a serving government minister are not in line with Theresa May’s position that “at heart we are one people”'
Comments
Boris Johnson, under the guidance of the Evil Demon Cummings, played right into this, with his promise of 350,000,000 per week for the NHS.
Everybody knows that Mrs May has not even started to negotiate anything, far less to bring about our triumphant exit from the EU. So she is still given the benefit of the doubt.
But I have the feeling that the general complacency will not last much longer, and then all the people who thought their wishes would come trueonce they voted to leave the EU, will wake up to reality. Mr Farage and UKIP were not the answer to anybody`s problems and they never were. Mrs May and her hordes of Conservative spinners aren`t the answer either.
The Conservative Party, like UKIP before it, is gong to come down with a very loud crash.
Just my opinion, of course.
Provided politicians don't f*ck it up.
Claims of opt-outs being a great success don't resolve the existential issue of why you'd want to be a member of a destiny-setting club but not share the key aims of the club, or a common vision for the end-point.
http://www.france24.com/en/20170318-pictures-france-presidential-election-eleven-candidates-endorsements
I agree that it was an important fork in the road in terms of political discourse because it legitimised the notion that there was something negative about opting in.
What we have got over the years is a series of sticking-plaster solutions usually based on gerrymandering with Labour's Scottish Devo being one of the finest examples of the whole thing. Even now, we are just coasting along.
I am thoroughly annoyed at seeing what I regarded as one of the world's finest countries disintegrate. Then we have "Biff" doing his sideshow in Washington whilst his backers fill their financial boots with govt contracts, the EU looking distinctly wobbly and we have made sure that the Middle East is really unstable.
The world seems to be going to hell....
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/timeseries/czbh/mm23
Similarly unemployment had also increased from the low point of 2004:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/unemployment/timeseries/mgsx/lms
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/unemployment/timeseries/mgsc/unem
While home ownership had been falling from 2004 onwards.
None of these things tend to happen before a recession after a long period of economic growth - there must have been other factors causing them.
There were clear effects of immigration on working class communities before the recession and this could be seen as a political consequence in the local elections of 2007 and 2008. Hence Brown's "British Jobs For British Workers".
My new @slate interview podcast, I Have To Ask, is here. Please listen & subscribe! 1st guest: Sen. Chuck Schumer. (link: http://www.slate.com/articles/podcasts/i_have_to_ask/2017/03/chuck_schumer_discusses_democratic_strategy_in_the_age_of_donald_trump.html) slate.com/articles/podca….
1) Westminster elections
2015 71%
2010 64%
2005 61%
2001 58%
2) Holyrood elections
2016 56%
2011 50%
2007 52%
2003 49%
Far more Scots vote in Westminster elections than in Holyrood ones.
Given that fact, it is very insulting to Scottish people to call Westminster the "English parliament".
I did not expect that you would understand the difference between a country and a region
If she said the EU superstate was an ideal solution for Britain and we were going for full on integration and to that end we were joining the Euro.
William would praise her to the heavens
Sturgeon is just acting like a giant wrecking ball
A bit of a Red Letter Day
Something reinforced by the ignoring of referenda in France, Ireland and the Netherlands.
bye!
Social Attitudes Survey
Independence 46% (+7)
Devolution 42% (-7)
Direct rule from London 8% (+2)
8% for Monica's atavists.
Edited extra bit: ahem.
A friend recently made the jump from a series of bottom end jobs (classic blue collar stuff) to white collar office work of the middle class kind. It was a revelation to him - every legal rule of employment scrupulously enforced, clean & elegant offices, all the equipment required for his job available.
At this level of employment, there is a shortage of UK nationals - instead of the 50% going to university getting these jobs, employers import the equivalent of 2.1 or above from Russell Group universities to fill the gap. This is an improvement over the days when these kind of jobs went to Oxbridge + a couple of places, but......
So you have a nice clean, airy, well equipped office filled with a diverse selection of backgrounds... but who notices the missing demographics?
Apart from this world is another world. Visited only by Guardian journalists in the spirit of Sanders of the River going upcountry.... this is where most of the working population works. No-one in media bubble goes there.
PS Actually likely to be more than an 18% reduction because of the economic dislocation of independence and therefore a smaller taxbase and because there is tax to pay on government expenditure. If expenditure is reduced by a large amount, the tax take will also reduce by a non-neglible margin as well.
Office jobs were filled with people with a few O levels, if that. Indeed, the minimum requirement for an articled clerk to a solicitor or a pupil barrister or a trainee surveyor, or a commission in the forces, in fact just about anything was five O levels.
Some medieval estates in Devon used to separate themselves with a bank and ditch, except both estates would build one, making a double-ditch and banks. As these followed the edges of estates, they were used by others as transport routes without trespassing, and some eventually became Devonshire sunken lanes.
That sounds 100% legit, for sure.
I've not seen anyone even start to grasp this nettle.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Nevertheless, Germany owes.....
...vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany.
It's your knowledge of Scotch politics that make your interventions so plausible.
Occasionally we'd tramp around the lanes of Derbyshire trying to work out what caused each bend. A fairly ridiculous thing to do and I bet we got few if any right, but great father-and-son bonding time.
Going even further off-topic, a weird one is the three-way Trinity Bridge in Crowland: a lovely bridge that crosses nothing in the middle of the village.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_Bridge,_Crowland
Unfortunately I cannot work out a way to bring politics or betting into this post ...
'Bebb has written a column in his local paper arguing that Scotland is “clearly another country” and that his “gut feeling” is Scottish voters no longer see themselves as British. Fair to say these comments from a serving government minister are not in line with Theresa May’s position that “at heart we are one people”'
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/843097696294633474
He had a long criminal record including convictions for armed robbery, French media report.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39314250
BBC still struggling...I blame Tory cuts.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/18/jk-rowling-better-placed-lead-campaign-against-scottish-independence/
I've not seen anyone even start to grasp this nettle.
Agreed. However it is a bit more complicated. If you take 1980 as the starting point (actually the most favourable date for Scotland's case) the extra expenditure is balanced by the oil revenue. So just because the oil is running out now isn't necessarily the moment you say the model stops. Also the larger part of the difference in nominal deficits between England and Scotland is down to UK expenditure on things like social welfare and agricultural subsidies being applied at the same rates across the union. The calculation is different when Scotland is part of the Union and therefore there is a common good. and when Scotland is independent. In that case pensions etc will be lower in Scotland than England.
Also, Carlotta cannot hide her pleasure that Angela has been told "pay up" or else...
This brings the EU Army closer. France has nuclear weapons. So strictly speaking the EU does not need the US.
This is a clear sign the US under Trump will be an isolationist country no matter what they may say. His basic instincts are isolationist and, of course, to brazenly lie.
A giant Tunnock's Teacake gets my vote !
And how come there is universal suffrage in Scotland in elections to the British parliament, on exactly the same basis as in every other part of Britain? That's not how they did things in Algeria or Hong Kong.
Let's not blame the Saxons who founded Edinburgh for everything.
A communique is not a contract. If it was, then why only Germany.
It might be better if the Yanks left Europe anyway. WE can defend ourselves.
As the only time in history that Article 5 of NATO has been invoked was in defence of the USA, they should be wary of pushing this argument too far.