Astonishingly good figures for Sturgeon there, considering that this is a Great Britain-wide poll. She clearly has an awful lot of admirers in England. Rightly so.
The winner of the Next First Minister market depends largely on when Sturgeon decides to go.
There is of course the issue of what Ladbrokes and other bookies would do if the job title changes. That could be pre- or post-independence, or in conjunction with it. The office of First Minister of Norway was changed to Prime Minister of Norway 27 years prior to their successful independence referendum in 1905. On the other hand, even when independent, Scots could decide to keep the name of the office as First Minister, which has the advantage of familiarity. The job title is far less important than the substantive powers.
Norway and Sweden were in a personal rather than political Union under the crown of Sweden after 1873 (not 1878). That change was the reason why the title changed (and the location of the office, which was previously in Stockholm not Oslo). Scotland and England are in one United Kingdom. The parallel doesn’t work.
Or to put it another way, do you really think Boris Johnson or even Keir Starmer will be willing to put forward and pass legislation that would change the statutory office of First Minister established under Section 44 of the Scotland Act 1998, that would further the SNP narrative they both reject?
“one United Kingdom”
Ho ho.
I’m a big fan of the Johnson/Starmer Jock-bashing axis: they have both decided to simply keep building the dam higher and higher, as the weight of water behind the crumbling, ill-designed structure just keeps getting greater and greater. Tony Blair was no structural engineer, and his blueprint to “kill nationalism stone dead” has so enraged British Nationalists that they have set themselves on an irreversible course to destroying the thing they claim to love.
Are you saying Scotland is not part of the United Kingdom?
Intellectually: no.
Emotionally: no.
Technically: kind of.
Yet in 2014 55% of actual Scottish voters disagreed. And since then there is no metric other than a few MoE polls to suggest a substantial shift.
Try not to confuse wishful thinking from the safe(ish) distance of Sweden with reality.
55% of people resident in Scotland, which is not quite the same thing.
Personally, I’d prefer zero polling on this topic. The shock when the reality hits home as the dam collapses...
Umm, Scottish voters are ‘people resident in Scotland.’ That’s why they have, y’know, votes in Scotland.
The problem for Scottish independence is that while its supporters are becoming more strident the actual issues have, if anything, moved the fundamentals against them.
In 2014 there were serious doubts as to whether Scotland could remain in the EU, which was vital to the economic case for independence. Now, we know it wouldn’t be in the EU and would have to apply under article 49, a long process.
In 2014, there was a strong government with substantial Scottish representation in Westminster, which had worked effectively with the SNP to deliver a referendum that everyone agrees was free, fair and democratic, although some quibbles about the franchise and its extent remain. It was a government that could be expected to negotiate a divorce on a reasonable basis, in good faith. Now, we have a factional, divisive and populist English dominated government led by an unstable liar whose skills in negotiations are zero, and because of that, would not negotiate at all. His response would be, ‘independence? Fine. Sod off. Enjoy the border checks at Gretna.’
The oil price is on the floor and may never recover fully.
The pound, leaving aside its own serious issues, is being debased to support the government of the UK, and the Euro continues to be a mess, so the currency situation would still be unclear.
The SNP itself is divided and the Salmond saga is far from over. It may bring down Sturgeon. More likely it simply becomes a festering sore that taints a government noted for its patriotism but not for its executive ability.
Does that mean a referendum on independence would vote no again? Well, no, not for certain. Often these things are about emotion rather than reason (Brexit and perhaps more pertinently, the Irish Free State wave hello). And the mere fact the UK government is so unpopular in Scotland in itself does probably have an impact.
But there is no sign of a shift from 45-55 to the 60-40 that would probably be needed to call a referendum in the expectation of winning it. I strongly suspect, indeed, that if Sturgeon had thought May or Johnson would have granted her a referendum she wouldn’t have called for one, as a second ‘No’ really would kill independence and possibly the SNP stone dead.
Personally, I wonder if this all isn’t irrelevant anyway, as I think the age of the nation state (and there I include the EU) may be drawing to an end for other reasons. But I personally would be surprised if Scotland were to become independent in the next ten years. Not shocked, not dying of a heart attack, but surprised.
Ydoethur, your one weakness is your knowledge of Scotland , Independence, SNP etc. You don't half write a load of old bollocks on the topic. Apart from that keep up the good work. Might be worth reading some actual Scottish "real" news sites rather than the Times and Daily Mail.
You mean, I should lay off the Daily Record and the National that I was reading this morning?
I’m vain enough to be preening that you think it my ‘one weakness’ though.
(PS, I never read the Times. My newspaper of choice is the Guardian. No political reasons, I’m just a cheapskate.)
So, you subscribe to The National? A bit odd for a self-confessed cheapskate.
I get the free ripoffs.
(And I never read the Daily Express, btw. Sometimes the Mail, but not often.)
I didn’t understand much of your earlier post, which didn’t seem to really engage with anything I had said, but I think from your repeated unsubstantiated claims that I had spouted ‘ill-informed piffle’ that the view from Sweden is a negative?
Astonishingly good figures for Sturgeon there, considering that this is a Great Britain-wide poll. She clearly has an awful lot of admirers in England. Rightly so.
The winner of the Next First Minister market depends largely on when Sturgeon decides to go.
There is of course the issue of what Ladbrokes and other bookies would do if the job title changes. That could be pre- or post-independence, or in conjunction with it. The office of First Minister of Norway was changed to Prime Minister of Norway 27 years prior to their successful independence referendum in 1905. On the other hand, even when independent, Scots could decide to keep the name of the office as First Minister, which has the advantage of familiarity. The job title is far less important than the substantive powers.
Norway and Sweden were in a personal rather than political Union under the crown of Sweden after 1873 (not 1878). That change was the reason why the title changed (and the location of the office, which was previously in Stockholm not Oslo). Scotland and England are in one United Kingdom. The parallel doesn’t work.
Or to put it another way, do you really think Boris Johnson or even Keir Starmer will be willing to put forward and pass legislation that would change the statutory office of First Minister established under Section 44 of the Scotland Act 1998, that would further the SNP narrative they both reject?
“one United Kingdom”
Ho ho.
I’m a big fan of the Johnson/Starmer Jock-bashing axis: they have both decided to simply keep building the dam higher and higher, as the weight of water behind the crumbling, ill-designed structure just keeps getting greater and greater. Tony Blair was no structural engineer, and his blueprint to “kill nationalism stone dead” has so enraged British Nationalists that they have set themselves on an irreversible course to destroying the thing they claim to love.
Are you saying Scotland is not part of the United Kingdom?
Intellectually: no.
Emotionally: no.
Technically: kind of.
Yet in 2014 55% of actual Scottish voters disagreed. And since then there is no metric other than a few MoE polls to suggest a substantial shift.
Try not to confuse wishful thinking from the safe(ish) distance of Sweden with reality.
55% of people resident in Scotland, which is not quite the same thing.
Personally, I’d prefer zero polling on this topic. The shock when the reality hits home as the dam collapses...
Umm, Scottish voters are ‘people resident in Scotland.’ That’s why they have, y’know, votes in Scotland.
The problem for Scottish independence is that while its supporters are becoming more strident the actual issues have, if anything, moved the fundamentals against them.
In 2014 there were serious doubts as to whether Scotland could remain in the EU, which was vital to the economic case for independence. Now, we know it wouldn’t be in the EU and would have to apply under article 49, a long process.
In 2014, there was a strong government with substantial Scottish representation in Westminster, which had worked effectively with the SNP to deliver a referendum that everyone agrees was free, fair and democratic, although some quibbles about the franchise and its extent remain. It was a government that could be expected to negotiate a divorce on a reasonable basis, in good faith. Now, we have a factional, divisive and populist English dominated government led by an unstable liar whose skills in negotiations are zero, and because of that, would not negotiate at all. His response would be, ‘independence? Fine. Sod off. Enjoy the border checks at Gretna.’
The oil price is on the floor and may never recover fully.
The pound, leaving aside its own serious issues, is being debased to support the government of the UK, and the Euro continues to be a mess, so the currency situation would still be unclear.
The SNP itself is divided and the Salmond saga is far from over. It may bring down Sturgeon. More likely it simply becomes a festering sore that taints a government noted for its patriotism but not for its executive ability.
Does that mean a referendum on independence would vote no again? Well, no, not for certain. Often these things are about emotion rather than reason (Brexit and perhaps more pertinently, the Irish Free State wave hello). And the mere fact the UK government is so unpopular in Scotland in itself does probably have an impact.
But there is no sign of a shift from 45-55 to the 60-40 that would probably be needed to call a referendum in the expectation of winning it. I strongly suspect, indeed, that if Sturgeon had thought May or Johnson would have granted her a referendum she wouldn’t have called for one, as a second ‘No’ really would kill independence and possibly the SNP stone dead.
Personally, I wonder if this all isn’t irrelevant anyway, as I think the age of the nation state (and there I include the EU) may be drawing to an end for other reasons. But I personally would be surprised if Scotland were to become independent in the next ten years. Not shocked, not dying of a heart attack, but surprised.
Ydoethur, your one weakness is your knowledge of Scotland , Independence, SNP etc. You don't half write a load of old bollocks on the topic. Apart from that keep up the good work. Might be worth reading some actual Scottish "real" news sites rather than the Times and Daily Mail.
You mean, I should lay off the Daily Record and the National that I was reading this morning?
I’m vain enough to be preening that you think it my ‘one weakness’ though.
(PS, I never read the Times. My newspaper of choice is the Guardian. No political reasons, I’m just a cheapskate.)
So, you subscribe to The National? A bit odd for a self-confessed cheapskate.
Why do you need to subscribe to the National when it is online
Thanks for posting that. An interesting, if depressing, read for those (like me) who think that Biden will win comfortably. The main takeaway is that Biden cannot take black people`s votes for granted - many will not vote at all.
The left have decided to play by centrist rules for now and keep their positions.
This bloke has a strongly developed sense of irony.
He has grown up, changed his mind and decided to join the normal people. (Possible but unlikely.)
AFAIC he is one of the people who has to go if Labour is to become a party a Tory voter can vote for.
He was threatened with poverty if he did not retract more like, good for Rowling, if only everybody maligned by these fcukwit wokes had the money to threaten legal action.
Astonishingly good figures for Sturgeon there, considering that this is a Great Britain-wide poll. She clearly has an awful lot of admirers in England. Rightly so.
The winner of the Next First Minister market depends largely on when Sturgeon decides to go.
There is of course the issue of what Ladbrokes and other bookies would do if the job title changes. That could be pre- or post-independence, or in conjunction with it. The office of First Minister of Norway was changed to Prime Minister of Norway 27 years prior to their successful independence referendum in 1905. On the other hand, even when independent, Scots could decide to keep the name of the office as First Minister, which has the advantage of familiarity. The job title is far less important than the substantive powers.
Norway and Sweden were in a personal rather than political Union under the crown of Sweden after 1873 (not 1878). That change was the reason why the title changed (and the location of the office, which was previously in Stockholm not Oslo). Scotland and England are in one United Kingdom. The parallel doesn’t work.
Or to put it another way, do you really think Boris Johnson or even Keir Starmer will be willing to put forward and pass legislation that would change the statutory office of First Minister established under Section 44 of the Scotland Act 1998, that would further the SNP narrative they both reject?
“one United Kingdom”
Ho ho.
I’m a big fan of the Johnson/Starmer Jock-bashing axis: they have both decided to simply keep building the dam higher and higher, as the weight of water behind the crumbling, ill-designed structure just keeps getting greater and greater. Tony Blair was no structural engineer, and his blueprint to “kill nationalism stone dead” has so enraged British Nationalists that they have set themselves on an irreversible course to destroying the thing they claim to love.
Are you saying Scotland is not part of the United Kingdom?
Intellectually: no.
Emotionally: no.
Technically: kind of.
Yet in 2014 55% of actual Scottish voters disagreed. And since then there is no metric other than a few MoE polls to suggest a substantial shift.
Try not to confuse wishful thinking from the safe(ish) distance of Sweden with reality.
55% of people resident in Scotland, which is not quite the same thing.
Personally, I’d prefer zero polling on this topic. The shock when the reality hits home as the dam collapses...
Umm, Scottish voters are ‘people resident in Scotland.’ That’s why they have, y’know, votes in Scotland.
The problem for Scottish independence is that while its supporters are becoming more strident the actual issues have, if anything, moved the fundamentals against them.
In 2014 there were serious doubts as to whether Scotland could remain in the EU, which was vital to the economic case for independence. Now, we know it wouldn’t be in the EU and would have to apply under article 49, a long process.
In 2014, there was a strong government with substantial Scottish representation in Westminster, which had worked effectively with the SNP to deliver a referendum that everyone agrees was free, fair and democratic, although some quibbles about the franchise and its extent remain. It was a government that could be expected to negotiate a divorce on a reasonable basis, in good faith. Now, we have a factional, divisive and populist English dominated government led by an unstable liar whose skills in negotiations are zero, and because of that, would not negotiate at all. His response would be, ‘independence? Fine. Sod off. Enjoy the border checks at Gretna.’
The oil price is on the floor and may never recover fully.
The pound, leaving aside its own serious issues, is being debased to support the government of the UK, and the Euro continues to be a mess, so the currency situation would still be unclear.
The SNP itself is divided and the Salmond saga is far from over. It may bring down Sturgeon. More likely it simply becomes a festering sore that taints a government noted for its patriotism but not for its executive ability.
Does that mean a referendum on independence would vote no again? Well, no, not for certain. Often these things are about emotion rather than reason (Brexit and perhaps more pertinently, the Irish Free State wave hello). And the mere fact the UK government is so unpopular in Scotland in itself does probably have an impact.
But there is no sign of a shift from 45-55 to the 60-40 that would probably be needed to call a referendum in the expectation of winning it. I strongly suspect, indeed, that if Sturgeon had thought May or Johnson would have granted her a referendum she wouldn’t have called for one, as a second ‘No’ really would kill independence and possibly the SNP stone dead.
Personally, I wonder if this all isn’t irrelevant anyway, as I think the age of the nation state (and there I include the EU) may be drawing to an end for other reasons. But I personally would be surprised if Scotland were to become independent in the next ten years. Not shocked, not dying of a heart attack, but surprised.
Ydoethur, your one weakness is your knowledge of Scotland , Independence, SNP etc. You don't half write a load of old bollocks on the topic. Apart from that keep up the good work. Might be worth reading some actual Scottish "real" news sites rather than the Times and Daily Mail.
You mean, I should lay off the Daily Record and the National that I was reading this morning?
I’m vain enough to be preening that you think it my ‘one weakness’ though.
(PS, I never read the Times. My newspaper of choice is the Guardian. No political reasons, I’m just a cheapskate.)
So, you subscribe to The National? A bit odd for a self-confessed cheapskate.
I get the free ripoffs.
(And I never read the Daily Express, btw. Sometimes the Mail, but not often.)
I didn’t understand much of your earlier post, which didn’t seem to really engage with anything I had said, but I think from your repeated unsubstantiated claims that I had spouted ‘ill-informed piffle’ that the view from Sweden is a negative?
As I have just said to Malc you reflect the way the Scots Nats dismissed every reasonable argument 70 years ago and it got then nowhere.
If and when another referendum is held serious questions will require serious answers, not insults and hyperbole
I think the point is you can’t make an economic case for independence. Salmond tried that several times and got rebuffed. The numbers simply don’t add up without epic fiddling.
The emotional case is the strong one. ‘Scotland is a grown up nation and deserves better than being run by the English’ is a powerful argument. Farage showed how effective it was on the far weaker emotional case for exiting the EU.
The question is whether it’s strong enough, on its own. At the moment such evidence as there is suggests not. That may change, of course.
The left have decided to play by centrist rules for now and keep their positions.
This bloke has a strongly developed sense of irony.
He has grown up, changed his mind and decided to join the normal people. (Possible but unlikely.)
AFAIC he is one of the people who has to go if Labour is to become a party a Tory voter can vote for.
He was threatened with poverty if he did not retract more like, good for Rowling, if only everybody maligned by these fcukwit wokes had the money to threaten legal action.
It is rather amusing to watch them try and deal with someone they can't "cancel", someone who has way too much money to care what others think of them.
Shadsy also has prices up for Next First Minister. Kate Forbes strikes me as being very short indeed at 4/1. Does Shadsy have some inside info? I know Forbes well (she represents an area I have strong connections with), and I admire her, but she is still young and relatively untested. 4/1 just strikes me as being far too short.
If you’re looking for a longer-odds tip, I like the look of Andrew Wilson at 33/1. An outstanding personality within the independence movement, the former MSP is (unusually for SNP figures) widely respected and admired throughout the Scottish establishment: business, finance sector, media, academia, civil society and even among the other political parties. But the key problem is that I am not aware that he is even standing next year? If he doesn’t, it’s very hard to see how he can build his internal base sufficiently in time to replace Sturgeon.
Looking at the top Unionist candidates, Richard Leonard (SLab) has shortened to 16/1, presumably on the back of the Starmer effect? But Leonard himself is universally regarded as a figure of ridicule, not least within his own party; and the SLD’s wouldn’t touch him with a bargepole. Jackson Carlaw (SCon) remains 25/1. That is way too short. The Scottish Labour and Liberal Democrat parties would implode if their leaderships ever tried to install the hapless Tory as first minister. Carlaw would be poor value at 50/1. Not quite sure why Shadsy is still listing Ruth Davidson at 20/1, shorter than her successor? She is retiring from parliament next year.
Stuart, Wilson is not even at the races.
I know, hence the 33/1. But I’m intrigued by Shadsy even listing him.
having Davidson as well, he has just picked some names he knows from the past. He is taking the piss having Leonard or Carlaw at anything under 1000-1
Shadsy also has prices up for Next First Minister. Kate Forbes strikes me as being very short indeed at 4/1. Does Shadsy have some inside info? I know Forbes well (she represents an area I have strong connections with), and I admire her, but she is still young and relatively untested. 4/1 just strikes me as being far too short.
If you’re looking for a longer-odds tip, I like the look of Andrew Wilson at 33/1. An outstanding personality within the independence movement, the former MSP is (unusually for SNP figures) widely respected and admired throughout the Scottish establishment: business, finance sector, media, academia, civil society and even among the other political parties. But the key problem is that I am not aware that he is even standing next year? If he doesn’t, it’s very hard to see how he can build his internal base sufficiently in time to replace Sturgeon.
Looking at the top Unionist candidates, Richard Leonard (SLab) has shortened to 16/1, presumably on the back of the Starmer effect? But Leonard himself is universally regarded as a figure of ridicule, not least within his own party; and the SLD’s wouldn’t touch him with a bargepole. Jackson Carlaw (SCon) remains 25/1. That is way too short. The Scottish Labour and Liberal Democrat parties would implode if their leaderships ever tried to install the hapless Tory as first minister. Carlaw would be poor value at 50/1. Not quite sure why Shadsy is still listing Ruth Davidson at 20/1, shorter than her successor? She is retiring from parliament next year.
Stuart, Wilson is not even at the races.
I know, hence the 33/1. But I’m intrigued by Shadsy even listing him.
having Davidson as well, he has just picked some names he knows from the past. He is taking the piss having Leonard or Carlaw at anything under 1000-1
The real scandal of the Ladbrokes market is the use of 3/2 to show the price traditionally written as 6/4.
Bet they’d write 100/30 as 10/3 too.
As for the market, I’m guessing we’ll be getting an autumn reshuffle so probably a dead heat with value on the current outsiders. Jenrick seems to have convinced the PM for now, so unless there’s more to the story we don’t know yet, he’s probably safe. Johnson seems to be following the Cameron approach of avoiding losing anyone if he can help it.
Is the move to the lowest common denominator thanks to the growth of online betting, and use of calculators ? If you’re not doing it in your head, the utility of the same denominator is reduced.
Agree about the market, and much as Williamson deserves the boot, it’s unclear that he’ll get it. If Johnson gave a damn, he wouldn’t have appointed him in the first place.
(Though Hamilton has form in being quick straight away, and given the long lay-off should be the overwhelming favourite.)
Which of course he is, at 2.95. A little too short IMO given the situation. Bottas won the first race last year of course, but I’m playing the first couple of races for very small money until we have a better idea of how things will look.
Very weird to start the season not knowing how many races there will be, nor when they’ll take place. 8 races scheduled so far, which if they all happen is the minimum required for a valid championship. Next target is 15, which is the minimum in the media rights and sponsorship contracts with F1 and costs them huge refunds if they go below. At the moment the Americas look like a no-go, so it’s going to be as many places as they can find in Europe until the weather turns in autumn, then maybe a couple in Asia and finish in the Middle East in December. Maybe even with crowds allowed by the end of the year (he says optimisticly, clutching a pair of tickets to the final race in Abu Dhabi).
This is the best sport to get into in current circumstances. All others are compromised either because you've lost the narrative of the season or because no crowd makes the events seem artificial. F1 suffers from neither drawback. New season, clean sheet, and the TV experience of watching the race is barely affected by there being no fans. It's a lifeline really.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Shadsy also has prices up for Next First Minister. Kate Forbes strikes me as being very short indeed at 4/1. Does Shadsy have some inside info? I know Forbes well (she represents an area I have strong connections with), and I admire her, but she is still young and relatively untested. 4/1 just strikes me as being far too short.
If you’re looking for a longer-odds tip, I like the look of Andrew Wilson at 33/1. An outstanding personality within the independence movement, the former MSP is (unusually for SNP figures) widely respected and admired throughout the Scottish establishment: business, finance sector, media, academia, civil society and even among the other political parties. But the key problem is that I am not aware that he is even standing next year? If he doesn’t, it’s very hard to see how he can build his internal base sufficiently in time to replace Sturgeon.
Looking at the top Unionist candidates, Richard Leonard (SLab) has shortened to 16/1, presumably on the back of the Starmer effect? But Leonard himself is universally regarded as a figure of ridicule, not least within his own party; and the SLD’s wouldn’t touch him with a bargepole. Jackson Carlaw (SCon) remains 25/1. That is way too short. The Scottish Labour and Liberal Democrat parties would implode if their leaderships ever tried to install the hapless Tory as first minister. Carlaw would be poor value at 50/1. Not quite sure why Shadsy is still listing Ruth Davidson at 20/1, shorter than her successor? She is retiring from parliament next year.
Stuart, Wilson is not even at the races.
I know, hence the 33/1. But I’m intrigued by Shadsy even listing him.
having Davidson as well, he has just picked some names he knows from the past. He is taking the piss having Leonard or Carlaw at anything under 1000-1
Astonishingly good figures for Sturgeon there, considering that this is a Great Britain-wide poll. She clearly has an awful lot of admirers in England. Rightly so.
The winner of the Next First Minister market depends largely on when Sturgeon decides to go.
There is of course the issue of what Ladbrokes and other bookies would do if the job title changes. That could be pre- or post-independence, or in conjunction with it. The office of First Minister of Norway was changed to Prime Minister of Norway 27 years prior to their successful independence referendum in 1905. On the other hand, even when independent, Scots could decide to keep the name of the office as First Minister, which has the advantage of familiarity. The job title is far less important than the substantive powers.
Norway and Sweden were in a personal rather than political Union under the crown of Sweden after 1873 (not 1878). That change was the reason why the title changed (and the location of the office, which was previously in Stockholm not Oslo). Scotland and England are in one United Kingdom. The parallel doesn’t work.
Or to put it another way, do you really think Boris Johnson or even Keir Starmer will be willing to put forward and pass legislation that would change the statutory office of First Minister established under Section 44 of the Scotland Act 1998, that would further the SNP narrative they both reject?
“one United Kingdom”
Ho ho.
I’m a big fan of the Johnson/Starmer Jock-bashing axis: they have both decided to simply keep building the dam higher and higher, as the weight of water behind the crumbling, ill-designed structure just keeps getting greater and greater. Tony Blair was no structural engineer, and his blueprint to “kill nationalism stone dead” has so enraged British Nationalists that they have set themselves on an irreversible course to destroying the thing they claim to love.
Are you saying Scotland is not part of the United Kingdom?
Intellectually: no.
Emotionally: no.
Technically: kind of.
Yet in 2014 55% of actual Scottish voters disagreed. And since then there is no metric other than a few MoE polls to suggest a substantial shift.
Try not to confuse wishful thinking from the safe(ish) distance of Sweden with reality.
55% of people resident in Scotland, which is not quite the same thing.
Personally, I’d prefer zero polling on this topic. The shock when the reality hits home as the dam collapses...
Umm, Scottish voters are ‘people resident in Scotland.’ That’s why they have, y’know, votes in Scotland.
The problem for Scottish independence is that while its supporters are becoming more strident the actual issues have, if anything, moved the fundamentals against them.
In 2014 there were serious doubts as to whether Scotland could remain in the EU, which was vital to the economic case for independence. Now, we know it wouldn’t be in the EU and would have to apply under article 49, a long process.
In 2014, there was a strong government with substantial Scottish representation in Westminster, which had worked effectively with the SNP to deliver a referendum that everyone agrees was free, fair and democratic, although some quibbles about the franchise and its extent remain. It was a government that could be expected to negotiate a divorce on a reasonable basis, in good faith. Now, we have a factional, divisive and populist English dominated government led by an unstable liar whose skills in negotiations are zero, and because of that, would not negotiate at all. His response would be, ‘independence? Fine. Sod off. Enjoy the border checks at Gretna.’
The oil price is on the floor and may never recover fully.
The pound, leaving aside its own serious issues, is being debased to support the government of the UK, and the Euro continues to be a mess, so the currency situation would still be unclear.
The SNP itself is divided and the Salmond saga is far from over. It may bring down Sturgeon. More likely it simply becomes a festering sore that taints a government noted for its patriotism but not for its executive ability.
Does that mean a referendum on independence would vote no again? Well, no, not for certain. Often these things are about emotion rather than reason (Brexit and perhaps more pertinently, the Irish Free State wave hello). And the mere fact the UK government is so unpopular in Scotland in itself does probably have an impact.
But there is no sign of a shift from 45-55 to the 60-40 that would probably be needed to call a referendum in the expectation of winning it. I strongly suspect, indeed, that if Sturgeon had thought May or Johnson would have granted her a referendum she wouldn’t have called for one, as a second ‘No’ really would kill independence and possibly the SNP stone dead.
Personally, I wonder if this all isn’t irrelevant anyway, as I think the age of the nation state (and there I include the EU) may be drawing to an end for other reasons. But I personally would be surprised if Scotland were to become independent in the next ten years. Not shocked, not dying of a heart attack, but surprised.
Ydoethur, your one weakness is your knowledge of Scotland , Independence, SNP etc. You don't half write a load of old bollocks on the topic. Apart from that keep up the good work. Might be worth reading some actual Scottish "real" news sites rather than the Times and Daily Mail.
Good morning Malc.
I have just had a 'wee chuckle' when I read your entirely predictable response to Ydoethur's intelligent and well stated argument as it reminds me of Scots Nats of 70 years ago expressing themselves in a very similar manner and it got them nowhere
Someday, the SNP may need to make their case in a serious debate and answer all the questions posed by Ydoethur and others, before even standing a chance of winning the argument and seeing the erection of a border crossing from Berwick to Carlisle
Morning G, reality is reality, if you look at the numbers we only have pensioners and English born residents who are not over 50% for Independence, first group are disappearing fast and second group are changing their minds, so not long to go. Unionists cannot boast about Scotland being a financial basketcase when it is solely down to the union and Westminster mismanagement of the Scottish economy that has us where we are, it is dawning on even the most stupid people that we could do no worse than Westminster does at ruining our economy.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
What austerity? Public spending went up every year from 2010.
Inflation adjusted? Excluding debt repayment?
Anyway Johnson believes in a magic money tree. This has always been obvious from his public pronouncements (and indeed actions). I doubt he’s given more than a cursory thought to the detail of how his “plans” can be delivered even were the money available.
Astonishingly good figures for Sturgeon there, considering that this is a Great Britain-wide poll. She clearly has an awful lot of admirers in England. Rightly so.
The winner of the Next First Minister market depends largely on when Sturgeon decides to go.
There is of course the issue of what Ladbrokes and other bookies would do if the job title changes. That could be pre- or post-independence, or in conjunction with it. The office of First Minister of Norway was changed to Prime Minister of Norway 27 years prior to their successful independence referendum in 1905. On the other hand, even when independent, Scots could decide to keep the name of the office as First Minister, which has the advantage of familiarity. The job title is far less important than the substantive powers.
Norway and Sweden were in a personal rather than political Union under the crown of Sweden after 1873 (not 1878). That change was the reason why the title changed (and the location of the office, which was previously in Stockholm not Oslo). Scotland and England are in one United Kingdom. The parallel doesn’t work.
Or to put it another way, do you really think Boris Johnson or even Keir Starmer will be willing to put forward and pass legislation that would change the statutory office of First Minister established under Section 44 of the Scotland Act 1998, that would further the SNP narrative they both reject?
“one United Kingdom”
Ho ho.
I’m a big fan of the Johnson/Starmer Jock-bashing axis: they have both decided to simply keep building the dam higher and higher, as the weight of water behind the crumbling, ill-designed structure just keeps getting greater and greater. Tony Blair was no structural engineer, and his blueprint to “kill nationalism stone dead” has so enraged British Nationalists that they have set themselves on an irreversible course to destroying the thing they claim to love.
Are you saying Scotland is not part of the United Kingdom?
Intellectually: no.
Emotionally: no.
Technically: kind of.
Yet in 2014 55% of actual Scottish voters disagreed. And since then there is no metric other than a few MoE polls to suggest a substantial shift.
Try not to confuse wishful thinking from the safe(ish) distance of Sweden with reality.
55% of people resident in Scotland, which is not quite the same thing.
Personally, I’d prefer zero polling on this topic. The shock when the reality hits home as the dam collapses...
Umm, Scottish voters are ‘people resident in Scotland.’ That’s why they have, y’know, votes in Scotland.
The problem for Scottish independence is that while its supporters are becoming more strident the actual issues have, if anything, moved the fundamentals against them.
In 2014 there were serious doubts as to whether Scotland could remain in the EU, which was vital to the economic case for independence. Now, we know it wouldn’t be in the EU and would have to apply under article 49, a long process.
In 2014, there was a strong government with substantial Scottish representation in Westminster, which had worked effectively with the SNP to deliver a referendum that everyone agrees was free, fair and democratic, although some quibbles about the franchise and its extent remain. It was a government that could be expected to negotiate a divorce on a reasonable basis, in good faith. Now, we have a factional, divisive and populist English dominated government led by an unstable liar whose skills in negotiations are zero, and because of that, would not negotiate at all. His response would be, ‘independence? Fine. Sod off. Enjoy the border checks at Gretna.’
The oil price is on the floor and may never recover fully.
The pound, leaving aside its own serious issues, is being debased to support the government of the UK, and the Euro continues to be a mess, so the currency situation would still be unclear.
The SNP itself is divided and the Salmond saga is far from over. It may bring down Sturgeon. More likely it simply becomes a festering sore that taints a government noted for its patriotism but not for its executive ability.
Does that mean a referendum on independence would vote no again? Well, no, not for certain. Often these things are about emotion rather than reason (Brexit and perhaps more pertinently, the Irish Free State wave hello). And the mere fact the UK government is so unpopular in Scotland in itself does probably have an impact.
But there is no sign of a shift from 45-55 to the 60-40 that would probably be needed to call a referendum in the expectation of winning it. I strongly suspect, indeed, that if Sturgeon had thought May or Johnson would have granted her a referendum she wouldn’t have called for one, as a second ‘No’ really would kill independence and possibly the SNP stone dead.
Personally, I wonder if this all isn’t irrelevant anyway, as I think the age of the nation state (and there I include the EU) may be drawing to an end for other reasons. But I personally would be surprised if Scotland were to become independent in the next ten years. Not shocked, not dying of a heart attack, but surprised.
Ydoethur, your one weakness is your knowledge of Scotland , Independence, SNP etc. You don't half write a load of old bollocks on the topic. Apart from that keep up the good work. Might be worth reading some actual Scottish "real" news sites rather than the Times and Daily Mail.
You mean, I should lay off the Daily Record and the National that I was reading this morning?
I’m vain enough to be preening that you think it my ‘one weakness’ though.
(PS, I never read the Times. My newspaper of choice is the Guardian. No political reasons, I’m just a cheapskate.)
So, you subscribe to The National? A bit odd for a self-confessed cheapskate.
Why do you need to subscribe to the National when it is online
You get one story a month and then only first two lines thereafter, bit like the Times, absolutely useless. Clickbait to keep the Herald alive.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Irony alert. You're mostly very reasonable but you're just as likely as this person to start bashing Labour for no reason.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Serious question if the Uk is going to build its way out of recession who is going to do it? It’s yet another Johnson headline to hide the fact that he has no real plans about how to deal with the coming recession. You might have 4 million unemployed but for what are they skilled? What are the going to build?
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
What austerity? Public spending went up every year from 2010.
Inflation adjusted? Excluding debt repayment?
Anyway Johnson believes in a magic money tree. This has always been obvious from his public pronouncements (and indeed actions). I doubt he’s given more than a cursory thought to the detail of how his “plans” can be delivered even were the money available.
The point was that large sectors were excluded, including the health service and anything to do with pensioners. What was left took very heavy cuts, most notably local government.
That is indeed an excellent article, and confirms my view for much of the earlier part of the year that there were huge dangers for the Democrats in picking Biden over Sanders. Unlike the author apparently, though, I think the overall outcome is still very much undecided.
Shadsy also has prices up for Next First Minister. Kate Forbes strikes me as being very short indeed at 4/1. Does Shadsy have some inside info? I know Forbes well (she represents an area I have strong connections with), and I admire her, but she is still young and relatively untested. 4/1 just strikes me as being far too short.
If you’re looking for a longer-odds tip, I like the look of Andrew Wilson at 33/1. An outstanding personality within the independence movement, the former MSP is (unusually for SNP figures) widely respected and admired throughout the Scottish establishment: business, finance sector, media, academia, civil society and even among the other political parties. But the key problem is that I am not aware that he is even standing next year? If he doesn’t, it’s very hard to see how he can build his internal base sufficiently in time to replace Sturgeon.
Looking at the top Unionist candidates, Richard Leonard (SLab) has shortened to 16/1, presumably on the back of the Starmer effect? But Leonard himself is universally regarded as a figure of ridicule, not least within his own party; and the SLD’s wouldn’t touch him with a bargepole. Jackson Carlaw (SCon) remains 25/1. That is way too short. The Scottish Labour and Liberal Democrat parties would implode if their leaderships ever tried to install the hapless Tory as first minister. Carlaw would be poor value at 50/1. Not quite sure why Shadsy is still listing Ruth Davidson at 20/1, shorter than her successor? She is retiring from parliament next year.
Stuart, Wilson is not even at the races.
I know, hence the 33/1. But I’m intrigued by Shadsy even listing him.
having Davidson as well, he has just picked some names he knows from the past. He is taking the piss having Leonard or Carlaw at anything under 1000-1
Does Cherry have a shout?
At grassroots level yes. Two big events will be the Salmond enquiry and then what SNP do at next election, if they keep back peddling on independence their will be trouble. Too many wokes have infiltrated at the top and are fat and happy and don't really care about independence. The natives are restless.
Astonishingly good figures for Sturgeon there, considering that this is a Great Britain-wide poll. She clearly has an awful lot of admirers in England. Rightly so.
The winner of the Next First Minister market depends largely on when Sturgeon decides to go.
There is of course the issue of what Ladbrokes and other bookies would do if the job title changes. That could be pre- or post-independence, or in conjunction with it. The office of First Minister of Norway was changed to Prime Minister of Norway 27 years prior to their successful independence referendum in 1905. On the other hand, even when independent, Scots could decide to keep the name of the office as First Minister, which has the advantage of familiarity. The job title is far less important than the substantive powers.
Norway and Sweden were in a personal rather than political Union under the crown of Sweden after 1873 (not 1878). That change was the reason why the title changed (and the location of the office, which was previously in Stockholm not Oslo). Scotland and England are in one United Kingdom. The parallel doesn’t work.
Or to put it another way, do you really think Boris Johnson or even Keir Starmer will be willing to put forward and pass legislation that would change the statutory office of First Minister established under Section 44 of the Scotland Act 1998, that would further the SNP narrative they both reject?
“one United Kingdom”
Ho ho.
I’m a big fan of the Johnson/Starmer Jock-bashing axis: they have both decided to simply keep building the dam higher and higher, as the weight of water behind the crumbling, ill-designed structure just keeps getting greater and greater. Tony Blair was no structural engineer, and his blueprint to “kill nationalism stone dead” has so enraged British Nationalists that they have set themselves on an irreversible course to destroying the thing they claim to love.
Are you saying Scotland is not part of the United Kingdom?
Intellectually: no.
Emotionally: no.
Technically: kind of.
Yet in 2014 55% of actual Scottish voters disagreed. And since then there is no metric other than a few MoE polls to suggest a substantial shift.
Try not to confuse wishful thinking from the safe(ish) distance of Sweden with reality.
55% of people resident in Scotland, which is not quite the same thing.
Personally, I’d prefer zero polling on this topic. The shock when the reality hits home as the dam collapses...
Umm, Scottish voters are ‘people resident in Scotland.’ That’s why they have, y’know, votes in Scotland.
The problem for Scottish independence is that while its supporters are becoming more strident the actual issues have, if anything, moved the fundamentals against them.
In 2014 there were serious doubts as to whether Scotland could remain in the EU, which was vital to the economic case for independence. Now, we know it wouldn’t be in the EU and would have to apply under article 49, a long process.
In 2014, there was a strong government with substantial Scottish representation in Westminster, which had worked effectively with the SNP to deliver a referendum that everyone agrees was free, fair and democratic, although some quibbles about the franchise and its extent remain. It was a government that could be expected to negotiate a divorce on a reasonable basis, in good faith. Now, we have a factional, divisive and populist English dominated government led by an unstable liar whose skills in negotiations are zero, and because of that, would not negotiate at all. His response would be, ‘independence? Fine. Sod off. Enjoy the border checks at Gretna.’
The oil price is on the floor and may never recover fully.
The pound, leaving aside its own serious issues, is being debased to support the government of the UK, and the Euro continues to be a mess, so the currency situation would still be unclear.
The SNP itself is divided and the Salmond saga is far from over. It may bring down Sturgeon. More likely it simply becomes a festering sore that taints a government noted for its patriotism but not for its executive ability.
Does that mean a referendum on independence would vote no again? Well, no, not for certain. Often these things are about emotion rather than reason (Brexit and perhaps more pertinently, the Irish Free State wave hello). And the mere fact the UK government is so unpopular in Scotland in itself does probably have an impact.
But there is no sign of a shift from 45-55 to the 60-40 that would probably be needed to call a referendum in the expectation of winning it. I strongly suspect, indeed, that if Sturgeon had thought May or Johnson would have granted her a referendum she wouldn’t have called for one, as a second ‘No’ really would kill independence and possibly the SNP stone dead.
Personally, I wonder if this all isn’t irrelevant anyway, as I think the age of the nation state (and there I include the EU) may be drawing to an end for other reasons. But I personally would be surprised if Scotland were to become independent in the next ten years. Not shocked, not dying of a heart attack, but surprised.
Ydoethur, your one weakness is your knowledge of Scotland , Independence, SNP etc. You don't half write a load of old bollocks on the topic. Apart from that keep up the good work. Might be worth reading some actual Scottish "real" news sites rather than the Times and Daily Mail.
Good morning Malc.
I have just had a 'wee chuckle' when I read your entirely predictable response to Ydoethur's intelligent and well stated argument as it reminds me of Scots Nats of 70 years ago expressing themselves in a very similar manner and it got them nowhere
Someday, the SNP may need to make their case in a serious debate and answer all the questions posed by Ydoethur and others, before even standing a chance of winning the argument and seeing the erection of a border crossing from Berwick to Carlisle
Morning G, reality is reality, if you look at the numbers we only have pensioners and English born residents who are not over 50% for Independence, first group are disappearing fast and second group are changing their minds, so not long to go. Unionists cannot boast about Scotland being a financial basketcase when it is solely down to the union and Westminster mismanagement of the Scottish economy that has us where we are, it is dawning on even the most stupid people that we could do no worse than Westminster does at ruining our economy.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
What austerity? Public spending went up every year from 2010.
Inflation adjusted? Excluding debt repayment?
Anyway Johnson believes in a magic money tree. This has always been obvious from his public pronouncements (and indeed actions). I doubt he’s given more than a cursory thought to the detail of how his “plans” can be delivered even were the money available.
Spending in real terms and spending per capita have both gone up since 2010. The largest increase has been in debt interest (not debt repayment, total debt is still rising), which even with rates on the floor still costs over £50bn a year.
Thinking about it, the one thing that's almost certain is that next year's government spending will be less than this year's has been, with its furlough schemes and exceptional support for business.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Irony alert. You're mostly very reasonable but you're just as likely as this person to start bashing Labour for no reason.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
G I think that it is you that is deflecting, can you answer the question, are we going to import all the construction workers, or train thousands of brickies or will it be Patel's fabled 8 million idlers that will be press ganged into doing it. Fine words butter no parsnips, Boris doing his windbag impersonation has so far built zilch.
Shadsy also has prices up for Next First Minister. Kate Forbes strikes me as being very short indeed at 4/1. Does Shadsy have some inside info? I know Forbes well (she represents an area I have strong connections with), and I admire her, but she is still young and relatively untested. 4/1 just strikes me as being far too short.
If you’re looking for a longer-odds tip, I like the look of Andrew Wilson at 33/1. An outstanding personality within the independence movement, the former MSP is (unusually for SNP figures) widely respected and admired throughout the Scottish establishment: business, finance sector, media, academia, civil society and even among the other political parties. But the key problem is that I am not aware that he is even standing next year? If he doesn’t, it’s very hard to see how he can build his internal base sufficiently in time to replace Sturgeon.
Looking at the top Unionist candidates, Richard Leonard (SLab) has shortened to 16/1, presumably on the back of the Starmer effect? But Leonard himself is universally regarded as a figure of ridicule, not least within his own party; and the SLD’s wouldn’t touch him with a bargepole. Jackson Carlaw (SCon) remains 25/1. That is way too short. The Scottish Labour and Liberal Democrat parties would implode if their leaderships ever tried to install the hapless Tory as first minister. Carlaw would be poor value at 50/1. Not quite sure why Shadsy is still listing Ruth Davidson at 20/1, shorter than her successor? She is retiring from parliament next year.
Stuart, Wilson is not even at the races.
I know, hence the 33/1. But I’m intrigued by Shadsy even listing him.
having Davidson as well, he has just picked some names he knows from the past. He is taking the piss having Leonard or Carlaw at anything under 1000-1
Surely they’re the markets he gets asked for?
Nothing wrong with the markets but having those jokers at 16-1 and 25-1 is a joke. I have more chance than both of them put together.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Irony alert. You're mostly very reasonable but you're just as likely as this person to start bashing Labour for no reason.
I have never criticised labour without a reason
...and that reason is, you don't like the Labour Party.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
What austerity? Public spending went up every year from 2010.
Inflation adjusted? Excluding debt repayment?
Anyway Johnson believes in a magic money tree. This has always been obvious from his public pronouncements (and indeed actions). I doubt he’s given more than a cursory thought to the detail of how his “plans” can be delivered even were the money available.
Spending in real terms and spending per capita have both gone up since 2010. The largest increase has been in debt interest (not debt repayment, total debt is still rising), which even with rates on the floor still costs over £50bn a year.
Thinking about it, the one thing that's almost certain is that next year's government spending will be less than this year's has been, with its furlough schemes and exceptional support for business.
We must hope so, certainly.
All other considerations aside, if it is as high or higher that means this bloody virus is still buggering us about.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Serious question if the Uk is going to build its way out of recession who is going to do it? It’s yet another Johnson headline to hide the fact that he has no real plans about how to deal with the coming recession. You might have 4 million unemployed but for what are they skilled? What are the going to build?
Your first sentence is valid
I expect there will be a national retraining scheme into all aspects of construction and the green economy with hundreds of thousands of apprenticeships and similarly retraining the unemployed
It is certain that millions will need to learn new skills and it will take time
As I have just said to Malc you reflect the way the Scots Nats dismissed every reasonable argument 70 years ago and it got then nowhere.
If and when another referendum is held serious questions will require serious answers, not insults and hyperbole
I think the point is you can’t make an economic case for independence. Salmond tried that several times and got rebuffed. The numbers simply don’t add up without epic fiddling.
The emotional case is the strong one. ‘Scotland is a grown up nation and deserves better than being run by the English’ is a powerful argument. Farage showed how effective it was on the far weaker emotional case for exiting the EU.
The question is whether it’s strong enough, on its own. At the moment such evidence as there is suggests not. That may change, of course.
Correct , it is impossible to know what the finances of Scotland would be if independent , given the arse the unionists claim to have made of it and continuously boasting of what a pig's ear they have made of it is bizarre. Would be hard to be any worse off and given we will have no debt and will implement policies to suit our own economy then it can only be better and bear little resemblance to the fiddled Westminster fake numbers.
Thanks for posting that. An interesting, if depressing, read for those (like me) who think that Biden will win comfortably. The main takeaway is that Biden cannot take black people`s votes for granted - many will not vote at all.
That's the political lesson. But it's also worth reading for people who just don't get what ordinary black people (not rioters or even activists) are bothered about - it illustrates @Casino_Royale 's helpful article the other day.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Irony alert. You're mostly very reasonable but you're just as likely as this person to start bashing Labour for no reason.
I have never criticised labour without a reason
...and that reason is, you don't like the Labour Party.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
What austerity? Public spending went up every year from 2010.
Inflation adjusted? Excluding debt repayment?
Anyway Johnson believes in a magic money tree. This has always been obvious from his public pronouncements (and indeed actions). I doubt he’s given more than a cursory thought to the detail of how his “plans” can be delivered even were the money available.
Spending in real terms and spending per capita have both gone up since 2010. The largest increase has been in debt interest (not debt repayment, total debt is still rising), which even with rates on the floor still costs over £50bn a year.
Thinking about it, the one thing that's almost certain is that next year's government spending will be less than this year's has been, with its furlough schemes and exceptional support for business.
Astonishingly good figures for Sturgeon there, considering that this is a Great Britain-wide poll. She clearly has an awful lot of admirers in England. Rightly so.
The winner of the Next First Minister market depends largely on when Sturgeon decides to go.
There is of course the issue of what Ladbrokes and other bookies would do if the job title changes. That could be pre- or post-independence, or in conjunction with it. The office of First Minister of Norway was changed to Prime Minister of Norway 27 years prior to their successful independence referendum in 1905. On the other hand, even when independent, Scots could decide to keep the name of the office as First Minister, which has the advantage of familiarity. The job title is far less important than the substantive powers.
Norway and Sweden were in a personal rather than political Union under the crown of Sweden after 1873 (not 1878). That change was the reason why the title changed (and the location of the office, which was previously in Stockholm not Oslo). Scotland and England are in one United Kingdom. The parallel doesn’t work.
Or to put it another way, do you really think Boris Johnson or even Keir Starmer will be willing to put forward and pass legislation that would change the statutory office of First Minister established under Section 44 of the Scotland Act 1998, that would further the SNP narrative they both reject?
“one United Kingdom”
Ho ho.
I’m a big fan of the Johnson/Starmer Jock-bashing axis: they have both decided to simply keep building the dam higher and higher, as the weight of water behind the crumbling, ill-designed structure just keeps getting greater and greater. Tony Blair was no structural engineer, and his blueprint to “kill nationalism stone dead” has so enraged British Nationalists that they have set themselves on an irreversible course to destroying the thing they claim to love.
Are you saying Scotland is not part of the United Kingdom?
Intellectually: no.
Emotionally: no.
Technically: kind of.
Yet in 2014 55% of actual Scottish voters disagreed. And since then there is no metric other than a few MoE polls to suggest a substantial shift.
Try not to confuse wishful thinking from the safe(ish) distance of Sweden with reality.
55% of people resident in Scotland, which is not quite the same thing.
Personally, I’d prefer zero polling on this topic. The shock when the reality hits home as the dam collapses...
Umm, Scottish voters are ‘people resident in Scotland.’ That’s why they have, y’know, votes in Scotland.
The problem for Scottish independence is that while its supporters are becoming more strident the actual issues have, if anything, moved the fundamentals against them.
In 2014 there were serious doubts as to whether Scotland could remain in the EU, which was vital to the economic case for independence. Now, we know it wouldn’t be in the EU and would have to apply under article 49, a long process.
In 2014, there was a strong government with substantial Scottish representation in Westminster, which had worked effectively with the SNP to deliver a referendum that everyone agrees was free, fair and democratic, although some quibbles about the franchise and its extent remain. It was a government that could be expected to negotiate a divorce on a reasonable basis, in good faith. Now, we have a factional, divisive and populist English dominated government led by an unstable liar whose skills in negotiations are zero, and because of that, would not negotiate at all. His response would be, ‘independence? Fine. Sod off. Enjoy the border checks at Gretna.’
The oil price is on the floor and may never recover fully.
The pound, leaving aside its own serious issues, is being debased to support the government of the UK, and the Euro continues to be a mess, so the currency situation would still be unclear.
The SNP itself is divided and the Salmond saga is far from over. It may bring down Sturgeon. More likely it simply becomes a festering sore that taints a government noted for its patriotism but not for its executive ability.
Does that mean a referendum on independence would vote no again? Well, no, not for certain. Often these things are about emotion rather than reason (Brexit and perhaps more pertinently, the Irish Free State wave hello). And the mere fact the UK government is so unpopular in Scotland in itself does probably have an impact.
But there is no sign of a shift from 45-55 to the 60-40 that would probably be needed to call a referendum in the expectation of winning it. I strongly suspect, indeed, that if Sturgeon had thought May or Johnson would have granted her a referendum she wouldn’t have called for one, as a second ‘No’ really would kill independence and possibly the SNP stone dead.
Personally, I wonder if this all isn’t irrelevant anyway, as I think the age of the nation state (and there I include the EU) may be drawing to an end for other reasons. But I personally would be surprised if Scotland were to become independent in the next ten years. Not shocked, not dying of a heart attack, but surprised.
Ydoethur, your one weakness is your knowledge of Scotland , Independence, SNP etc. You don't half write a load of old bollocks on the topic. Apart from that keep up the good work. Might be worth reading some actual Scottish "real" news sites rather than the Times and Daily Mail.
The big difference from 2014 is that neither of the two big Westminster parties have any skin in the game from Scotland anymore. The Secretary of State for Scotland isn't even from a Scottish constituency anymore. This matters - there are no longer credible Scottish unionists figures from Westminster to oppose the movement to indepdendence - so it will only be a matter of time.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Irony alert. You're mostly very reasonable but you're just as likely as this person to start bashing Labour for no reason.
I have never criticised labour without a reason
...and that reason is, you don't like the Labour Party.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Serious question if the Uk is going to build its way out of recession who is going to do it? It’s yet another Johnson headline to hide the fact that he has no real plans about how to deal with the coming recession. You might have 4 million unemployed but for what are they skilled? What are the going to build?
Your first sentence is valid
I expect there will be a national retraining scheme into all aspects of construction and the green economy with hundreds of thousands of apprenticeships and similarly retraining the unemployed
It is certain that millions will need to learn new skills and it will take time
I know nothing about the adult education sector does anyone know if we have the infrastructure for a major retraining programmer, lecturers, facilities etc?
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Serious question if the Uk is going to build its way out of recession who is going to do it? It’s yet another Johnson headline to hide the fact that he has no real plans about how to deal with the coming recession. You might have 4 million unemployed but for what are they skilled? What are the going to build?
Your first sentence is valid
I expect there will be a national retraining scheme into all aspects of construction and the green economy with hundreds of thousands of apprenticeships and similarly retraining the unemployed
It is certain that millions will need to learn new skills and it will take time
Yes, but it's certainly not happening yet. Current apprenticeship data shows around 17,000 starts in construction in 2019/20. Over the last 5 years, apprenticeships in construction have declined slightly. This is not many for a major re-building programme. By contrast, there were over 60,000 starting an apprenticeship in business administration.
Astonishingly good figures for Sturgeon there, considering that this is a Great Britain-wide poll. She clearly has an awful lot of admirers in England. Rightly so.
The winner of the Next First Minister market depends largely on when Sturgeon decides to go.
There is of course the issue of what Ladbrokes and other bookies would do if the job title changes. That could be pre- or post-independence, or in conjunction with it. The office of First Minister of Norway was changed to Prime Minister of Norway 27 years prior to their successful independence referendum in 1905. On the other hand, even when independent, Scots could decide to keep the name of the office as First Minister, which has the advantage of familiarity. The job title is far less important than the substantive powers.
Norway and Sweden were in a personal rather than political Union under the crown of Sweden after 1873 (not 1878). That change was the reason why the title changed (and the location of the office, which was previously in Stockholm not Oslo). Scotland and England are in one United Kingdom. The parallel doesn’t work.
Or to put it another way, do you really think Boris Johnson or even Keir Starmer will be willing to put forward and pass legislation that would change the statutory office of First Minister established under Section 44 of the Scotland Act 1998, that would further the SNP narrative they both reject?
“one United Kingdom”
Ho ho.
I’m a big fan of the Johnson/Starmer Jock-bashing axis: they have both decided to simply keep building the dam higher and higher, as the weight of water behind the crumbling, ill-designed structure just keeps getting greater and greater. Tony Blair was no structural engineer, and his blueprint to “kill nationalism stone dead” has so enraged British Nationalists that they have set themselves on an irreversible course to destroying the thing they claim to love.
Are you saying Scotland is not part of the United Kingdom?
Intellectually: no.
Emotionally: no.
Technically: kind of.
Yet in 2014 55% of actual Scottish voters disagreed. And since then there is no metric other than a few MoE polls to suggest a substantial shift.
Try not to confuse wishful thinking from the safe(ish) distance of Sweden with reality.
55% of people resident in Scotland, which is not quite the same thing.
Personally, I’d prefer zero polling on this topic. The shock when the reality hits home as the dam collapses...
Umm, Scottish voters are ‘people resident in Scotland.’ That’s why they have, y’know, votes in Scotland.
The problem for Scottish independence is that while its supporters are becoming more strident the actual issues have, if anything, moved the fundamentals against them.
In 2014 there were serious doubts as to whether Scotland could remain in the EU, which was vital to the economic case for independence. Now, we know it wouldn’t be in the EU and would have to apply under article 49, a long process.
In 2014, there was a strong government with substantial Scottish representation in Westminster, which had worked effectively with the SNP to deliver a referendum that everyone agrees was free, fair and democratic, although some quibbles about the franchise and its extent remain. It was a government that could be expected to negotiate a divorce on a reasonable basis, in good faith. Now, we have a factional, divisive and populist English dominated government led by an unstable liar whose skills in negotiations are zero, and because of that, would not negotiate at all. His response would be, ‘independence? Fine. Sod off. Enjoy the border checks at Gretna.’
The oil price is on the floor and may never recover fully.
The pound, leaving aside its own serious issues, is being debased to support the government of the UK, and the Euro continues to be a mess, so the currency situation would still be unclear.
The SNP itself is divided and the Salmond saga is far from over. It may bring down Sturgeon. More likely it simply becomes a festering sore that taints a government noted for its patriotism but not for its executive ability.
Does that mean a referendum on independence would vote no again? Well, no, not for certain. Often these things are about emotion rather than reason (Brexit and perhaps more pertinently, the Irish Free State wave hello). And the mere fact the UK government is so unpopular in Scotland in itself does probably have an impact.
But there is no sign of a shift from 45-55 to the 60-40 that would probably be needed to call a referendum in the expectation of winning it. I strongly suspect, indeed, that if Sturgeon had thought May or Johnson would have granted her a referendum she wouldn’t have called for one, as a second ‘No’ really would kill independence and possibly the SNP stone dead.
Personally, I wonder if this all isn’t irrelevant anyway, as I think the age of the nation state (and there I include the EU) may be drawing to an end for other reasons. But I personally would be surprised if Scotland were to become independent in the next ten years. Not shocked, not dying of a heart attack, but surprised.
Ydoethur, your one weakness is your knowledge of Scotland , Independence, SNP etc. You don't half write a load of old bollocks on the topic. Apart from that keep up the good work. Might be worth reading some actual Scottish "real" news sites rather than the Times and Daily Mail.
The big difference from 2014 is that neither of the two big Westminster parties have any skin in the game from Scotland anymore. The Secretary of State for Scotland isn't even from a Scottish constituency anymore. This matters - there are no longer credible Scottish unionists figures from Westminster to oppose the movement to indepdendence - so it will only be a matter of time.
This lack of political talent is also of course why the SNP have locked out Holyrood for so long.
I remember when SNP activists were trying to go easy on Wendy Alexander on the grounds that if she was removed and replaced by somebody competent it would be a disaster for the SNP.
The real scandal of the Ladbrokes market is the use of 3/2 to show the price traditionally written as 6/4.
Bet they’d write 100/30 as 10/3 too.
As for the market, I’m guessing we’ll be getting an autumn reshuffle so probably a dead heat with value on the current outsiders. Jenrick seems to have convinced the PM for now, so unless there’s more to the story we don’t know yet, he’s probably safe. Johnson seems to be following the Cameron approach of avoiding losing anyone if he can help it.
Is the move to the lowest common denominator thanks to the growth of online betting, and use of calculators ? If you’re not doing it in your head, the utility of the same denominator is reduced.
Agree about the market, and much as Williamson deserves the boot, it’s unclear that he’ll get it. If Johnson gave a damn, he wouldn’t have appointed him in the first place.
(Though Hamilton has form in being quick straight away, and given the long lay-off should be the overwhelming favourite.)
Which of course he is, at 2.95. A little too short IMO given the situation. Bottas won the first race last year of course, but I’m playing the first couple of races for very small money until we have a better idea of how things will look.
Very weird to start the season not knowing how many races there will be, nor when they’ll take place. 8 races scheduled so far, which if they all happen is the minimum required for a valid championship. Next target is 15, which is the minimum in the media rights and sponsorship contracts with F1 and costs them huge refunds if they go below. At the moment the Americas look like a no-go, so it’s going to be as many places as they can find in Europe until the weather turns in autumn, then maybe a couple in Asia and finish in the Middle East in December. Maybe even with crowds allowed by the end of the year (he says optimisticly, clutching a pair of tickets to the final race in Abu Dhabi).
This is the best sport to get into in current circumstances. All others are compromised either because you've lost the narrative of the season or because no crowd makes the events seem artificial. F1 suffers from neither drawback. New season, clean sheet, and the TV experience of watching the race is barely affected by there being no fans. It's a lifeline really.
F1 isn't quite the spectator experience it used to be, you don't feel the cars go past as was the case with the old V10s and don't need ear muffs any more - the F2 cars are noisier! The cornering and braking performance of F1 cars never really comes across on TV as much as watching live - they're astonishingly quick!
As you say, it's a new season and will be easier to follow, although a little weird for those involved with all the new processes and travel arrangements, will feel like a test session with no crowd, no sponsors and limited media. For the most part, the crowd aren't part of the TV experience though (as in football or rugby) so it shouldn't be massively different for the at-home viewer.
Thanks for posting that. An interesting, if depressing, read for those (like me) who think that Biden will win comfortably. The main takeaway is that Biden cannot take black people`s votes for granted - many will not vote at all.
That's the political lesson. But it's also worth reading for people who just don't get what ordinary black people (not rioters or even activists) are bothered about - it illustrates @Casino_Royale 's helpful article the other day.
You might expect me to say this but from the sample of black professional people I've spoken to personally (not representative: all in my network, so all middle-class, and in their 30s to early 40s) they just want what the rest of us have: good careers, good schools, decent home to own, safe neighbourhoods etc.
Most of them are enthusiastic and practicing Christians as well, which I found interesting.
Astonishingly good figures for Sturgeon there, considering that this is a Great Britain-wide poll. She clearly has an awful lot of admirers in England. Rightly so.
The winner of the Next First Minister market depends largely on when Sturgeon decides to go.
There is of course the issue of what Ladbrokes and other bookies would do if the job title changes. That could be pre- or post-independence, or in conjunction with it. The office of First Minister of Norway was changed to Prime Minister of Norway 27 years prior to their successful independence referendum in 1905. On the other hand, even when independent, Scots could decide to keep the name of the office as First Minister, which has the advantage of familiarity. The job title is far less important than the substantive powers.
Norway and Sweden were in a personal rather than political Union under the crown of Sweden after 1873 (not 1878). That change was the reason why the title changed (and the location of the office, which was previously in Stockholm not Oslo). Scotland and England are in one United Kingdom. The parallel doesn’t work.
Or to put it another way, do you really think Boris Johnson or even Keir Starmer will be willing to put forward and pass legislation that would change the statutory office of First Minister established under Section 44 of the Scotland Act 1998, that would further the SNP narrative they both reject?
“one United Kingdom”
Ho ho.
I’m a big fan of the Johnson/Starmer Jock-bashing axis: they have both decided to simply keep building the dam higher and higher, as the weight of water behind the crumbling, ill-designed structure just keeps getting greater and greater. Tony Blair was no structural engineer, and his blueprint to “kill nationalism stone dead” has so enraged British Nationalists that they have set themselves on an irreversible course to destroying the thing they claim to love.
Are you saying Scotland is not part of the United Kingdom?
Intellectually: no.
Emotionally: no.
Technically: kind of.
Yet in 2014 55% of actual Scottish voters disagreed. And since then there is no metric other than a few MoE polls to suggest a substantial shift.
Try not to confuse wishful thinking from the safe(ish) distance of Sweden with reality.
55% of people resident in Scotland, which is not quite the same thing.
Personally, I’d prefer zero polling on this topic. The shock when the reality hits home as the dam collapses...
Umm, Scottish voters are ‘people resident in Scotland.’ That’s why they have, y’know, votes in Scotland.
The problem for Scottish independence is that while its supporters are becoming more strident the actual issues have, if anything, moved the fundamentals against them.
In 2014 there were serious doubts as to whether Scotland could remain in the EU, which was vital to the economic case for independence. Now, we know it wouldn’t be in the EU and would have to apply under article 49, a long process.
In 2014, there was a strong government with substantial Scottish representation in Westminster, which had worked effectively with the SNP to deliver a referendum that everyone agrees was free, fair and democratic, although some quibbles about the franchise and its extent remain. It was a government that could be expected to negotiate a divorce on a reasonable basis, in good faith. Now, we have a factional, divisive and populist English dominated government led by an unstable liar whose skills in negotiations are zero, and because of that, would not negotiate at all. His response would be, ‘independence? Fine. Sod off. Enjoy the border checks at Gretna.’
The oil price is on the floor and may never recover fully.
The pound, leaving aside its own serious issues, is being debased to support the government of the UK, and the Euro continues to be a mess, so the currency situation would still be unclear.
The SNP itself is divided and the Salmond saga is far from over. It may bring down Sturgeon. More likely it simply becomes a festering sore that taints a government noted for its patriotism but not for its executive ability.
Does that mean a referendum on independence would vote no again? Well, no, not for certain. Often these things are about emotion rather than reason (Brexit and perhaps more pertinently, the Irish Free State wave hello). And the mere fact the UK government is so unpopular in Scotland in itself does probably have an impact.
But there is no sign of a shift from 45-55 to the 60-40 that would probably be needed to call a referendum in the expectation of winning it. I strongly suspect, indeed, that if Sturgeon had thought May or Johnson would have granted her a referendum she wouldn’t have called for one, as a second ‘No’ really would kill independence and possibly the SNP stone dead.
Personally, I wonder if this all isn’t irrelevant anyway, as I think the age of the nation state (and there I include the EU) may be drawing to an end for other reasons. But I personally would be surprised if Scotland were to become independent in the next ten years. Not shocked, not dying of a heart attack, but surprised.
Ydoethur, your one weakness is your knowledge of Scotland , Independence, SNP etc. You don't half write a load of old bollocks on the topic. Apart from that keep up the good work. Might be worth reading some actual Scottish "real" news sites rather than the Times and Daily Mail.
The big difference from 2014 is that neither of the two big Westminster parties have any skin in the game from Scotland anymore. The Secretary of State for Scotland isn't even from a Scottish constituency anymore. This matters - there are no longer credible Scottish unionists figures from Westminster to oppose the movement to indepdendence - so it will only be a matter of time.
Agreed and Johnson seems hell bent on pissing off Scots as well just to make it more certain.
He likes power more than his beliefs. Welcome to the real world.
It does prove that he can moderate himself, albeit after the fact here, meaning and further ridiculousness he might come out with can no longer be called a mistake.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Serious question if the Uk is going to build its way out of recession who is going to do it? It’s yet another Johnson headline to hide the fact that he has no real plans about how to deal with the coming recession. You might have 4 million unemployed but for what are they skilled? What are the going to build?
Your first sentence is valid
I expect there will be a national retraining scheme into all aspects of construction and the green economy with hundreds of thousands of apprenticeships and similarly retraining the unemployed
It is certain that millions will need to learn new skills and it will take time
And Angela Rayner should be leading on this morning noon and night for Labour.
As Shadow Education Secretary she wasn’t so hot on schools and universities but her ideas on lifelong learning were both brilliant and if implemented would be revolutionary.
This is what I was alluding to in the very first post on this thread. Jenrick survives because he is, now on this second issue, a human shield for Boris.
And this is why he was appointed in the first place
If you wanted someone as a poster boy for Tory sleaze you couldn't do much better than Jenrick. That smug pudgy countenance looks like it has spent a lot of time in the trough.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Serious question if the Uk is going to build its way out of recession who is going to do it? It’s yet another Johnson headline to hide the fact that he has no real plans about how to deal with the coming recession. You might have 4 million unemployed but for what are they skilled? What are the going to build?
Your first sentence is valid
I expect there will be a national retraining scheme into all aspects of construction and the green economy with hundreds of thousands of apprenticeships and similarly retraining the unemployed
It is certain that millions will need to learn new skills and it will take time
Yes, but it's certainly not happening yet. Current apprenticeship data shows around 17,000 starts in construction in 2019/20. Over the last 5 years, apprenticeships in construction have declined slightly. This is not many for a major re-building programme. By contrast, there were over 60,000 starting an apprenticeship in business administration.
How many apprenticeships in export import agency work? Have HMRC got a recruitment drive on to ensure enough revenue staff to collect import tariffs and check standards?
Astonishingly good figures for Sturgeon there, considering that this is a Great Britain-wide poll. She clearly has an awful lot of admirers in England. Rightly so.
The winner of the Next First Minister market depends largely on when Sturgeon decides to go.
There is of course the issue of what Ladbrokes and other bookies would do if the job title changes. That could be pre- or post-independence, or in conjunction with it. The office of First Minister of Norway was changed to Prime Minister of Norway 27 years prior to their successful independence referendum in 1905. On the other hand, even when independent, Scots could decide to keep the name of the office as First Minister, which has the advantage of familiarity. The job title is far less important than the substantive powers.
Norway and Sweden were in a personal rather than political Union under the crown of Sweden after 1873 (not 1878). That change was the reason why the title changed (and the location of the office, which was previously in Stockholm not Oslo). Scotland and England are in one United Kingdom. The parallel doesn’t work.
Or to put it another way, do you really think Boris Johnson or even Keir Starmer will be willing to put forward and pass legislation that would change the statutory office of First Minister established under Section 44 of the Scotland Act 1998, that would further the SNP narrative they both reject?
“one United Kingdom”
Ho ho.
I’m a big fan of the Johnson/Starmer Jock-bashing axis: they have both decided to simply keep building the dam higher and higher, as the weight of water behind the crumbling, ill-designed structure just keeps getting greater and greater. Tony Blair was no structural engineer, and his blueprint to “kill nationalism stone dead” has so enraged British Nationalists that they have set themselves on an irreversible course to destroying the thing they claim to love.
Are you saying Scotland is not part of the United Kingdom?
Intellectually: no.
Emotionally: no.
Technically: kind of.
Yet in 2014 55% of actual Scottish voters disagreed. And since then there is no metric other than a few MoE polls to suggest a substantial shift.
Try not to confuse wishful thinking from the safe(ish) distance of Sweden with reality.
55% of people resident in Scotland, which is not quite the same thing.
Personally, I’d prefer zero polling on this topic. The shock when the reality hits home as the dam collapses...
Umm, Scottish voters are ‘people resident in Scotland.’ That’s why they have, y’know, votes in Scotland.
The problem for Scottish independence is that while its supporters are becoming more strident the actual issues have, if anything, moved the fundamentals against them.
In 2014 there were serious doubts as to whether Scotland could remain in the EU, which was vital to the economic case for independence. Now, we know it wouldn’t be in the EU and would have to apply under article 49, a long process.
In 2014, there was a strong government with substantial Scottish representation in Westminster, which had worked effectively with the SNP to deliver a referendum that everyone agrees was free, fair and democratic, although some quibbles about the franchise and its extent remain. It was a government that could be expected to negotiate a divorce on a reasonable basis, in good faith. Now, we have a factional, divisive and populist English dominated government led by an unstable liar whose skills in negotiations are zero, and because of that, would not negotiate at all. His response would be, ‘independence? Fine. Sod off. Enjoy the border checks at Gretna.’
The oil price is on the floor and may never recover fully.
The pound, leaving aside its own serious issues, is being debased to support the government of the UK, and the Euro continues to be a mess, so the currency situation would still be unclear.
The SNP itself is divided and the Salmond saga is far from over. It may bring down Sturgeon. More likely it simply becomes a festering sore that taints a government noted for its patriotism but not for its executive ability.
Does that mean a referendum on independence would vote no again? Well, no, not for certain. Often these things are about emotion rather than reason (Brexit and perhaps more pertinently, the Irish Free State wave hello). And the mere fact the UK government is so unpopular in Scotland in itself does probably have an impact.
But there is no sign of a shift from 45-55 to the 60-40 that would probably be needed to call a referendum in the expectation of winning it. I strongly suspect, indeed, that if Sturgeon had thought May or Johnson would have granted her a referendum she wouldn’t have called for one, as a second ‘No’ really would kill independence and possibly the SNP stone dead.
Personally, I wonder if this all isn’t irrelevant anyway, as I think the age of the nation state (and there I include the EU) may be drawing to an end for other reasons. But I personally would be surprised if Scotland were to become independent in the next ten years. Not shocked, not dying of a heart attack, but surprised.
Ydoethur, your one weakness is your knowledge of Scotland , Independence, SNP etc. You don't half write a load of old bollocks on the topic. Apart from that keep up the good work. Might be worth reading some actual Scottish "real" news sites rather than the Times and Daily Mail.
The big difference from 2014 is that neither of the two big Westminster parties have any skin in the game from Scotland anymore. The Secretary of State for Scotland isn't even from a Scottish constituency anymore. This matters - there are no longer credible Scottish unionists figures from Westminster to oppose the movement to indepdendence - so it will only be a matter of time.
This lack of political talent is also of course why the SNP have locked out Holyrood for so long.
I remember when SNP activists were trying to go easy on Wendy Alexander on the grounds that if she was removed and replaced by somebody competent it would be a disaster for the SNP.
With hindsight, their pessimism is quite funny.
She was indeed the last regional Labour party person with a functioning brain. Where they dredged up the current dross is hard to imagine.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Serious question if the Uk is going to build its way out of recession who is going to do it? It’s yet another Johnson headline to hide the fact that he has no real plans about how to deal with the coming recession. You might have 4 million unemployed but for what are they skilled? What are the going to build?
Are you saying that education, educason, eduduccazzun hasn't led to a skilled workforce ?
Or that a huge increase in university graduates with their huge increase in first class degrees hasn't led to a skilled workforce ?
Or that a huge increase in migrant workers hasn't led to a skilled workforce ?
As I have just said to Malc you reflect the way the Scots Nats dismissed every reasonable argument 70 years ago and it got then nowhere.
If and when another referendum is held serious questions will require serious answers, not insults and hyperbole
I think the point is you can’t make an economic case for independence. Salmond tried that several times and got rebuffed. The numbers simply don’t add up without epic fiddling.
The emotional case is the strong one. ‘Scotland is a grown up nation and deserves better than being run by the English’ is a powerful argument. Farage showed how effective it was on the far weaker emotional case for exiting the EU.
The question is whether it’s strong enough, on its own. At the moment such evidence as there is suggests not. That may change, of course.
Correct , it is impossible to know what the finances of Scotland would be if independent , given the arse the unionists claim to have made of it and continuously boasting of what a pig's ear they have made of it is bizarre. Would be hard to be any worse off and given we will have no debt and will implement policies to suit our own economy then it can only be better and bear little resemblance to the fiddled Westminster fake numbers.
Your last sentence falls as it is just the decades long nationalists hyperbole
I really do look forward to a referendum and these issues being openly discussed and of course the recent decision by Starmer, and no doubt Brown, determination to defend the union just raised the bar much higher
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Serious question if the Uk is going to build its way out of recession who is going to do it? It’s yet another Johnson headline to hide the fact that he has no real plans about how to deal with the coming recession. You might have 4 million unemployed but for what are they skilled? What are the going to build?
Are you saying that education, educason, eduduccazzun hasn't led to a skilled workforce ?
Or that a huge increase in university graduates with their huge increase in first class degrees hasn't led to a skilled workforce ?
Or that a huge increase in migrant workers hasn't led to a skilled workforce ?
Being serious, I get the impression people know it will be bad when the impact hits, but havent really absorbed how bad it could be. And I think Boris probably knows nothing he says will make people realise it until it happens. People wont give credit to some accurately talking of disaster.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Serious question if the Uk is going to build its way out of recession who is going to do it? It’s yet another Johnson headline to hide the fact that he has no real plans about how to deal with the coming recession. You might have 4 million unemployed but for what are they skilled? What are the going to build?
Your first sentence is valid
I expect there will be a national retraining scheme into all aspects of construction and the green economy with hundreds of thousands of apprenticeships and similarly retraining the unemployed
It is certain that millions will need to learn new skills and it will take time
I know nothing about the adult education sector does anyone know if we have the infrastructure for a major retraining programmer, lecturers, facilities etc?
No - and yes.
No, in the sense it doesn’t exist at this moment.
Yes, in the sense it could be created without too much hassle simply be reorienting a number of universities, mainly but not exclusively ex-polys, towards it.
The University of the West of England and the University of South Wales would, off the top of my head, both be well placed for such things. The University of Wolverhampton has already been doing it for years. The University of Gloucestershire does something similar through Stroud and South Gloucestershire College.
It would require some heads to be banged together but somebody with guts and imagination could have a major lifelong sector in twelve months.
Thanks for posting that. An interesting, if depressing, read for those (like me) who think that Biden will win comfortably. The main takeaway is that Biden cannot take black people`s votes for granted - many will not vote at all.
That's the political lesson. But it's also worth reading for people who just don't get what ordinary black people (not rioters or even activists) are bothered about - it illustrates @Casino_Royale 's helpful article the other day.
Yes - it is very interesting. I wonder whether middle class black people here feel the same way and what can be done about it, if so.
As I have just said to Malc you reflect the way the Scots Nats dismissed every reasonable argument 70 years ago and it got then nowhere.
If and when another referendum is held serious questions will require serious answers, not insults and hyperbole
I think the point is you can’t make an economic case for independence. Salmond tried that several times and got rebuffed. The numbers simply don’t add up without epic fiddling.
The emotional case is the strong one. ‘Scotland is a grown up nation and deserves better than being run by the English’ is a powerful argument. Farage showed how effective it was on the far weaker emotional case for exiting the EU.
The question is whether it’s strong enough, on its own. At the moment such evidence as there is suggests not. That may change, of course.
Correct , it is impossible to know what the finances of Scotland would be if independent , given the arse the unionists claim to have made of it and continuously boasting of what a pig's ear they have made of it is bizarre. Would be hard to be any worse off and given we will have no debt and will implement policies to suit our own economy then it can only be better and bear little resemblance to the fiddled Westminster fake numbers.
Your last sentence falls as it is just the decades long nationalists hyperbole
I really do look forward to a referendum and these issues being openly discussed and of course the recent decision by Starmer, and no doubt Brown, determination to defend the union just raised the bar much higher
You are fighting WWI G if you think anyone gives a crap for Starmer , London millionaire peer or failed loser , Northern Britisher Brown. Both part of theestablishment of Westminster troughers. PS: Can you answer following, why is Scotland with all its natural resources poorer than every developed small nation of a similar size on every measurement, most of whom have little or no natural resources in comparison. Tell me how the union managed that success.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
It's easier to train pilots to lay bricks, than to train bricklayers to fly planes!
But yes, there needs to be encouragement for companies to take on staff for a career switch, maybe something like an employer NI relief for a year on new hires who have been unemployed for six months?
Also, huge discounts on Open University for the unemployed - many (such as pilots) would happily learn accounting or computer science.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Serious question if the Uk is going to build its way out of recession who is going to do it? It’s yet another Johnson headline to hide the fact that he has no real plans about how to deal with the coming recession. You might have 4 million unemployed but for what are they skilled? What are the going to build?
Are you saying that education, educason, eduduccazzun hasn't led to a skilled workforce ?
Or that a huge increase in university graduates with their huge increase in first class degrees hasn't led to a skilled workforce ?
Or that a huge increase in migrant workers hasn't led to a skilled workforce ?
Refreshing comment. Even if people think hes too hard on himself clearly hes not vainly resistant to the idea. Has Corbyn weighed in? He struck me as a once humble man who got a little too in to his sainted reputation with his followers.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Serious question if the Uk is going to build its way out of recession who is going to do it? It’s yet another Johnson headline to hide the fact that he has no real plans about how to deal with the coming recession. You might have 4 million unemployed but for what are they skilled? What are the going to build?
Your first sentence is valid
I expect there will be a national retraining scheme into all aspects of construction and the green economy with hundreds of thousands of apprenticeships and similarly retraining the unemployed
It is certain that millions will need to learn new skills and it will take time
I know nothing about the adult education sector does anyone know if we have the infrastructure for a major retraining programmer, lecturers, facilities etc?
No we don't. Finding decent lecturers in subjects like construction, engineering etc, is a nightmare. The FE sector has been starved of funds for many years, especially for adult education.
The apprenticeship levy was supposed to solve some of the problems, but it hasn't worked well. Too many apprenticeships are of low quality, aimed at the wrong sectors of the economy, and are simply using government money for accrediting older workers for jobs that they have done for years. In too many cases, the money is being used to save on employers' training budgets rather than investing in new skills, particularly for young people.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Irony alert. You're mostly very reasonable but you're just as likely as this person to start bashing Labour for no reason.
I have never criticised labour without a reason
...and that reason is, you don't like the Labour Party.
That is not true. I voted for Blair twice.
I rest my case.
Your comment demonstrates why labour were defeated so heavily in December
Blair attracted voters from across the political divide and the only way back for labour is for Starmer to do the same
He has made a good start and his big test will be later this year when he may have to expel some well known labour mps post the ECHR report
I also expect later this year he will take the sensible move of demanding single market membership of the EU, if Boris is heading for a no deal
If that happens, and covid remains a serious issue, I expect labour will be outpolling the conservatives by some distance
LRM is one of the MPs that is going to need to be removed from the Shadow Cabinet. He's one of those that holds back the progress Keir is making.
He's remarkably unpleasant.
He is. The issue of misogyny in political parties is going to need to be addressed. Dismissing a woman’s experiences and perspectives because someone does not like the political implications of those experiences and perspectives is not the sole prerogative of MPs like him.
Thanks for posting that. An interesting, if depressing, read for those (like me) who think that Biden will win comfortably. The main takeaway is that Biden cannot take black people`s votes for granted - many will not vote at all.
That's the political lesson. But it's also worth reading for people who just don't get what ordinary black people (not rioters or even activists) are bothered about - it illustrates @Casino_Royale 's helpful article the other day.
You might expect me to say this but from the sample of black professional people I've spoken to personally (not representative: all in my network, so all middle-class, and in their 30s to early 40s) they just want what the rest of us have: good careers, good schools, decent home to own, safe neighbourhoods etc.
Most of them are enthusiastic and practicing Christians as well, which I found interesting.
All of them are married with families.
I don't find it surprising at all. As always people have a lot more in common than they realise and assuming that someone has a different outlook to life because they have different colour skin is basically stupid.
Thanks for posting that. An interesting, if depressing, read for those (like me) who think that Biden will win comfortably. The main takeaway is that Biden cannot take black people`s votes for granted - many will not vote at all.
That's the political lesson. But it's also worth reading for people who just don't get what ordinary black people (not rioters or even activists) are bothered about - it illustrates @Casino_Royale 's helpful article the other day.
Yes - it is very interesting. I wonder whether middle class black people here feel the same way and what can be done about it, if so.
I found the recent article from Dina Asher-Smith was v powerful.
" These few weeks have been so hard for so many people for a number of different reasons. For me, it was because it brought up so many suppressed memories and restated that it doesn’t matter what I do or accomplish, how kind or “good” a person I may be, how educated or well-intentioned I am, there are people out there that seek to do me wrong because of the colour of my skin. There are layers and layers of “unconscious” bias at best, and hate at worst, that affect my life on a day-to-day basis.
It’s being assumed that I am an employee rather than an attendee at a black-tie event. It’s being assumed that I come from a single-parent household and having consistently to emphasise that yes, my father is present and does come to my races… yes he’s over there… and yes, he is loving and supportive, he has been since the day I was born. It’s having to smile through the shocked “Oh” that follows that. It’s being followed around not so inconspicuously by security in a store from the moment you step in. It’s being assumed you can’t afford to buy anything in a nice shop."
As I have just said to Malc you reflect the way the Scots Nats dismissed every reasonable argument 70 years ago and it got then nowhere.
If and when another referendum is held serious questions will require serious answers, not insults and hyperbole
I think the point is you can’t make an economic case for independence. Salmond tried that several times and got rebuffed. The numbers simply don’t add up without epic fiddling.
The emotional case is the strong one. ‘Scotland is a grown up nation and deserves better than being run by the English’ is a powerful argument. Farage showed how effective it was on the far weaker emotional case for exiting the EU.
The question is whether it’s strong enough, on its own. At the moment such evidence as there is suggests not. That may change, of course.
Correct , it is impossible to know what the finances of Scotland would be if independent , given the arse the unionists claim to have made of it and continuously boasting of what a pig's ear they have made of it is bizarre. Would be hard to be any worse off and given we will have no debt and will implement policies to suit our own economy then it can only be better and bear little resemblance to the fiddled Westminster fake numbers.
Your last sentence falls as it is just the decades long nationalists hyperbole
I really do look forward to a referendum and these issues being openly discussed and of course the recent decision by Starmer, and no doubt Brown, determination to defend the union just raised the bar much higher
You are fighting WWI G if you think anyone gives a crap for Starmer , London millionaire peer or failed loser , Northern Britisher Brown. Both part of theestablishment of Westminster troughers. PS: Can you answer following, why is Scotland with all its natural resources poorer than every developed small nation of a similar size on every measurement, most of whom have little or no natural resources in comparison. Tell me how the union managed that success.
Hi Malc. I’m just getting a bit concerned about these comments.
An hour and a half and not a single turnip has been thrown yet,
Has the hot weather had a negative effect on stockpiles or are you saving them for phase 2 of lockdown?
Good speech (on paper). I could find little to disagree with. I would be interested in @ydoethur's view of Gove's assessment of his own education reforms!
In a sense the Government has been lucky - a lot of what they clearly wanted to do anyway will be covered under Covid stimulus.
Thanks for posting that. An interesting, if depressing, read for those (like me) who think that Biden will win comfortably. The main takeaway is that Biden cannot take black people`s votes for granted - many will not vote at all.
That's the political lesson. But it's also worth reading for people who just don't get what ordinary black people (not rioters or even activists) are bothered about - it illustrates @Casino_Royale 's helpful article the other day.
You might expect me to say this but from the sample of black professional people I've spoken to personally (not representative: all in my network, so all middle-class, and in their 30s to early 40s) they just want what the rest of us have: good careers, good schools, decent home to own, safe neighbourhoods etc.
Most of them are enthusiastic and practicing Christians as well, which I found interesting.
All of them are married with families.
I'd guess that most of them would be reluctant to "take the knee". The black people I know don't see themselves as black, they see themselves as people.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Serious question if the Uk is going to build its way out of recession who is going to do it? It’s yet another Johnson headline to hide the fact that he has no real plans about how to deal with the coming recession. You might have 4 million unemployed but for what are they skilled? What are the going to build?
Your first sentence is valid
I expect there will be a national retraining scheme into all aspects of construction and the green economy with hundreds of thousands of apprenticeships and similarly retraining the unemployed
It is certain that millions will need to learn new skills and it will take time
Yes, but it's certainly not happening yet. Current apprenticeship data shows around 17,000 starts in construction in 2019/20. Over the last 5 years, apprenticeships in construction have declined slightly. This is not many for a major re-building programme. By contrast, there were over 60,000 starting an apprenticeship in business administration.
I do not think HMG can be expected to have a full retraining programme in place for covid when it is actually only 4 months since the outbreak started
The speech by the COE in a couple of weeks should address the issue
F1 isn't quite the spectator experience it used to be, you don't feel the cars go past as was the case with the old V10s and don't need ear muffs any more - the F2 cars are noisier! The cornering and braking performance of F1 cars never really comes across on TV as much as watching live - they're astonishingly quick!
I think F1 is rapidly losing its commercial relevance. You only have to look at how many car manufacturers are in Formula E (8) compared to F1 (4) to see which way the wind is blowing.
The Gove-Cummings reforms mean that working class lads at our local school are having to study English Literature and French rather than bricklaying. They hate it...
The problem was schools having low expectations for kids whose Mum and Dad didn’t care about education... the solution should never have been to pretend that every kid was bound for a PPE course at Oxford...
That is indeed an excellent article, and confirms my view for much of the earlier part of the year that there were huge dangers for the Democrats in picking Biden over Sanders. Unlike the author apparently, though, I think the overall outcome is still very much undecided.
Interesting read for insight but there is no logic to its conclusion that Trump is likely to win again. It's the delta from 2016 which matters. Biden should do a bit better than Clinton with black voters and this, together with Trump's small but significant loss of support from those who voted for him last time, makes a clear Dem win overwhelmingly likely. I sense the people in the piece saying Trump will win are doing so from a place of resigned pessimism - which is the overall tone of the quoted conversations - rather than from an analysis of the actual election in front of us. So, a good read, but nothing there to change my view of Nov 3rd.
As I have just said to Malc you reflect the way the Scots Nats dismissed every reasonable argument 70 years ago and it got then nowhere.
If and when another referendum is held serious questions will require serious answers, not insults and hyperbole
I think the point is you can’t make an economic case for independence. Salmond tried that several times and got rebuffed. The numbers simply don’t add up without epic fiddling.
The emotional case is the strong one. ‘Scotland is a grown up nation and deserves better than being run by the English’ is a powerful argument. Farage showed how effective it was on the far weaker emotional case for exiting the EU.
The question is whether it’s strong enough, on its own. At the moment such evidence as there is suggests not. That may change, of course.
Correct , it is impossible to know what the finances of Scotland would be if independent , given the arse the unionists claim to have made of it and continuously boasting of what a pig's ear they have made of it is bizarre. Would be hard to be any worse off and given we will have no debt and will implement policies to suit our own economy then it can only be better and bear little resemblance to the fiddled Westminster fake numbers.
Your last sentence falls as it is just the decades long nationalists hyperbole
I really do look forward to a referendum and these issues being openly discussed and of course the recent decision by Starmer, and no doubt Brown, determination to defend the union just raised the bar much higher
You are fighting WWI G if you think anyone gives a crap for Starmer , London millionaire peer or failed loser , Northern Britisher Brown. Both part of theestablishment of Westminster troughers. PS: Can you answer following, why is Scotland with all its natural resources poorer than every developed small nation of a similar size on every measurement, most of whom have little or no natural resources in comparison. Tell me how the union managed that success.
Astonishingly good figures for Sturgeon there, considering that this is a Great Britain-wide poll. She clearly has an awful lot of admirers in England. Rightly so.
The winner of the Next First Minister market depends largely on when Sturgeon decides to go.
There is of course the issue of what Ladbrokes and other bookies would do if the job title changes. That could be pre- or post-independence, or in conjunction with it. The office of First Minister of Norway was changed to Prime Minister of Norway 27 years prior to their successful independence referendum in 1905. On the other hand, even when independent, Scots could decide to keep the name of the office as First Minister, which has the advantage of familiarity. The job title is far less important than the substantive powers.
Norway and Sweden were in a personal rather than political Union under the crown of Sweden after 1873 (not 1878). That change was the reason why the title changed (and the location of the office, which was previously in Stockholm not Oslo). Scotland and England are in one United Kingdom. The parallel doesn’t work.
Or to put it another way, do you really think Boris Johnson or even Keir Starmer will be willing to put forward and pass legislation that would change the statutory office of First Minister established under Section 44 of the Scotland Act 1998, that would further the SNP narrative they both reject?
“one United Kingdom”
Ho ho.
I’m a big fan of the Johnson/Starmer Jock-bashing axis: they have both decided to simply keep building the dam higher and higher, as the weight of water behind the crumbling, ill-designed structure just keeps getting greater and greater. Tony Blair was no structural engineer, and his blueprint to “kill nationalism stone dead” has so enraged British Nationalists that they have set themselves on an irreversible course to destroying the thing they claim to love.
Are you saying Scotland is not part of the United Kingdom?
Intellectually: no.
Emotionally: no.
Technically: kind of.
Yet in 2014 55% of actual Scottish voters disagreed. And since then there is no metric other than a few MoE polls to suggest a substantial shift.
Try not to confuse wishful thinking from the safe(ish) distance of Sweden with reality.
55% of people resident in Scotland, which is not quite the same thing.
Personally, I’d prefer zero polling on this topic. The shock when the reality hits home as the dam collapses...
Umm, Scottish voters are ‘people resident in Scotland.’ That’s why they have, y’know, votes in Scotland.
The problem for Scottish independence is that while its supporters are becoming more strident the actual issues have, if anything, moved the fundamentals against them.
In 2014 there were serious doubts as to whether Scotland could remain in the EU, which was vital to the economic case for independence. Now, we know it wouldn’t be in the EU and would have to apply under article 49, a long process.
In 2014, there was a strong government with substantial Scottish representation in Westminster, which had worked effectively with the SNP to deliver a referendum that everyone agrees was free, fair and democratic, although some quibbles about the franchise and its extent remain. It was a government that could be expected to negotiate a divorce on a reasonable basis, in good faith. Now, we have a factional, divisive and populist English dominated government led by an unstable liar whose skills in negotiations are zero, and because of that, would not negotiate at all. His response would be, ‘independence? Fine. Sod off. Enjoy the border checks at Gretna.’
The oil price is on the floor and may never recover fully.
The pound, leaving aside its own serious issues, is being debased to support the government of the UK, and the Euro continues to be a mess, so the currency situation would still be unclear.
The SNP itself is divided and the Salmond saga is far from over. It may bring down Sturgeon. More likely it simply becomes a festering sore that taints a government noted for its patriotism but not for its executive ability.
Does that mean a referendum on independence would vote no again? Well, no, not for certain. Often these things are about emotion rather than reason (Brexit and perhaps more pertinently, the Irish Free State wave hello). And the mere fact the UK government is so unpopular in Scotland in itself does probably have an impact.
But there is no sign of a shift from 45-55 to the 60-40 that would probably be needed to call a referendum in the expectation of winning it. I strongly suspect, indeed, that if Sturgeon had thought May or Johnson would have granted her a referendum she wouldn’t have called for one, as a second ‘No’ really would kill independence and possibly the SNP stone dead.
Personally, I wonder if this all isn’t irrelevant anyway, as I think the age of the nation state (and there I include the EU) may be drawing to an end for other reasons. But I personally would be surprised if Scotland were to become independent in the next ten years. Not shocked, not dying of a heart attack, but surprised.
Ydoethur, your one weakness is your knowledge of Scotland , Independence, SNP etc. You don't half write a load of old bollocks on the topic. Apart from that keep up the good work. Might be worth reading some actual Scottish "real" news sites rather than the Times and Daily Mail.
The big difference from 2014 is that neither of the two big Westminster parties have any skin in the game from Scotland anymore. The Secretary of State for Scotland isn't even from a Scottish constituency anymore. This matters - there are no longer credible Scottish unionists figures from Westminster to oppose the movement to indepdendence - so it will only be a matter of time.
Only STV - or similar electoral reform for Westminster elections - can ensure that there are Unionist MPs elected in respectable numbers from Scotland.
The election of 80% SNP MPs on 45% of the vote completely distorts the political climate.
F1 isn't quite the spectator experience it used to be, you don't feel the cars go past as was the case with the old V10s and don't need ear muffs any more - the F2 cars are noisier! The cornering and braking performance of F1 cars never really comes across on TV as much as watching live - they're astonishingly quick!
I think F1 is rapidly losing its commercial relevance. You only have to look at how many car manufacturers are in Formula E (8) compared to F1 (4) to see which way the wind is blowing.
I'm not sure how relevant that is. For me, F1 has always been better when the teams have mostly been independents. I don't think the sport would be damaged if Mercedes decided to do one.
No return to the austerity of 10 years ago, I'll believe that when I see it
Who’s going to do all the construction work Johnson is promising? Will there be ‘crash’ course for pilots to convert to bricklaying?
Why do you think that comment helps towards the need to re-engineer our economy post covid. Maybe offer constructive criticism rather than political nonsense
Serious question if the Uk is going to build its way out of recession who is going to do it? It’s yet another Johnson headline to hide the fact that he has no real plans about how to deal with the coming recession. You might have 4 million unemployed but for what are they skilled? What are the going to build?
Your first sentence is valid
I expect there will be a national retraining scheme into all aspects of construction and the green economy with hundreds of thousands of apprenticeships and similarly retraining the unemployed
It is certain that millions will need to learn new skills and it will take time
Yes, but it's certainly not happening yet. Current apprenticeship data shows around 17,000 starts in construction in 2019/20. Over the last 5 years, apprenticeships in construction have declined slightly. This is not many for a major re-building programme. By contrast, there were over 60,000 starting an apprenticeship in business administration.
I do not think HMG can be expected to have a full retraining programme in place for covid when it is actually only 4 months since the outbreak started
The speech by the COE in a couple of weeks should address the issue
Given that four months ago the UK was about to embark on HS2, Heathrow third runway, opening railway lines in the north, etc then one would have thought that the plans for construction skills training would already be well advanced. How are they going?
Comments
(And I never read the Daily Express, btw. Sometimes the Mail, but not often.)
I didn’t understand much of your earlier post, which didn’t seem to really engage with anything I had said, but I think from your repeated unsubstantiated claims that I had spouted ‘ill-informed piffle’ that the view from Sweden is a negative?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lloyd_Russell-Moyle
The emotional case is the strong one. ‘Scotland is a grown up nation and deserves better than being run by the English’ is a powerful argument. Farage showed how effective it was on the far weaker emotional case for exiting the EU.
The question is whether it’s strong enough, on its own. At the moment such evidence as there is suggests not. That may change, of course.
The fanbois are drooling over it.
Unionists cannot boast about Scotland being a financial basketcase when it is solely down to the union and Westminster mismanagement of the Scottish economy that has us where we are, it is dawning on even the most stupid people that we could do no worse than Westminster does at ruining our economy.
Maybe you need to get out more
Anyway Johnson believes in a magic money tree. This has always been obvious from his public pronouncements (and indeed actions). I doubt he’s given more than a cursory thought to the detail of how his “plans” can be delivered even were the money available.
Thinking about it, the one thing that's almost certain is that next year's government spending will be less than this year's has been, with its furlough schemes and exceptional support for business.
Fine words butter no parsnips, Boris doing his windbag impersonation has so far built zilch.
All other considerations aside, if it is as high or higher that means this bloody virus is still buggering us about.
I expect there will be a national retraining scheme into all aspects of construction and the green economy with hundreds of thousands of apprenticeships and similarly retraining the unemployed
It is certain that millions will need to learn new skills and it will take time
I remember when SNP activists were trying to go easy on Wendy Alexander on the grounds that if she was removed and replaced by somebody competent it would be a disaster for the SNP.
With hindsight, their pessimism is quite funny.
As you say, it's a new season and will be easier to follow, although a little weird for those involved with all the new processes and travel arrangements, will feel like a test session with no crowd, no sponsors and limited media. For the most part, the crowd aren't part of the TV experience though (as in football or rugby) so it shouldn't be massively different for the at-home viewer.
Most of them are enthusiastic and practicing Christians as well, which I found interesting.
All of them are married with families.
Does he have the discipline I wonder?
As Shadow Education Secretary she wasn’t so hot on schools and universities but her ideas on lifelong learning were both brilliant and if implemented would be revolutionary.
Or that a huge increase in university graduates with their huge increase in first class degrees hasn't led to a skilled workforce ?
Or that a huge increase in migrant workers hasn't led to a skilled workforce ?
I really do look forward to a referendum and these issues being openly discussed and of course the recent decision by Starmer, and no doubt Brown, determination to defend the union just raised the bar much higher
Being serious, I get the impression people know it will be bad when the impact hits, but havent really absorbed how bad it could be. And I think Boris probably knows nothing he says will make people realise it until it happens. People wont give credit to some accurately talking of disaster.
No, in the sense it doesn’t exist at this moment.
Yes, in the sense it could be created without too much hassle simply be reorienting a number of universities, mainly but not exclusively ex-polys, towards it.
The University of the West of England and the University of South Wales would, off the top of my head, both be well placed for such things. The University of Wolverhampton has already been doing it for years. The University of Gloucestershire does something similar through Stroud and South Gloucestershire College.
It would require some heads to be banged together but somebody with guts and imagination could have a major lifelong sector in twelve months.
PS: Can you answer following, why is Scotland with all its natural resources poorer than every developed small nation of a similar size on every measurement, most of whom have little or no natural resources in comparison. Tell me how the union managed that success.
But yes, there needs to be encouragement for companies to take on staff for a career switch, maybe something like an employer NI relief for a year on new hires who have been unemployed for six months?
Also, huge discounts on Open University for the unemployed - many (such as pilots) would happily learn accounting or computer science.
Oh bugger...
The apprenticeship levy was supposed to solve some of the problems, but it hasn't worked well. Too many apprenticeships are of low quality, aimed at the wrong sectors of the economy, and are simply using government money for accrediting older workers for jobs that they have done for years. In too many cases, the money is being used to save on employers' training budgets rather than investing in new skills, particularly for young people.
Blair attracted voters from across the political divide and the only way back for labour is for Starmer to do the same
He has made a good start and his big test will be later this year when he may have to expel some well known labour mps post the ECHR report
I also expect later this year he will take the sensible move of demanding single market membership of the EU, if Boris is heading for a no deal
If that happens, and covid remains a serious issue, I expect labour will be outpolling the conservatives by some distance
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/athletics/2020/06/25/think-racism-hasnt-affected-almost-every-day/
" These few weeks have been so hard for so many people for a number of different reasons. For me, it was because it brought up so many suppressed memories and restated that it doesn’t matter what I do or accomplish, how kind or “good” a person I may be, how educated or well-intentioned I am, there are people out there that seek to do me wrong because of the colour of my skin. There are layers and layers of “unconscious” bias at best, and hate at worst, that affect my life on a day-to-day basis.
It’s being assumed that I am an employee rather than an attendee at a black-tie event. It’s being assumed that I come from a single-parent household and having consistently to emphasise that yes, my father is present and does come to my races… yes he’s over there… and yes, he is loving and supportive, he has been since the day I was born. It’s having to smile through the shocked “Oh” that follows that. It’s being followed around not so inconspicuously by security in a store from the moment you step in. It’s being assumed you can’t afford to buy anything in a nice shop."
An hour and a half and not a single turnip has been thrown yet,
Has the hot weather had a negative effect on stockpiles or are you saving them for phase 2 of lockdown?
Hell. Has. Frozen. Over.
https://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2020/06/if-this-government-is-to-reform-so-much-it-must-also-reform-itself-goves-speech-on-change-in-whitehall-full-text.html
Good speech (on paper). I could find little to disagree with. I would be interested in @ydoethur's view of Gove's assessment of his own education reforms!
In a sense the Government has been lucky - a lot of what they clearly wanted to do anyway will be covered under Covid stimulus.
The speech by the COE in a couple of weeks should address the issue
The problem was schools having low expectations for kids whose Mum and Dad didn’t care about education... the solution should never have been to pretend that every kid was bound for a PPE course at Oxford...
The election of 80% SNP MPs on 45% of the vote completely distorts the political climate.