"To be clear: this is not about England saying that Scotland couldn’t stay in the pound. If we choose to leave the UK, it would be us leaving the UK pound. There is no easy or certain way to get back in. After having been found-out on NATO and EU membership, the SNP should stop pretending that Scotland will automatically inherit things."
Just so we are clear, with 8.4% of the assets and reserves, how much of the Bank of England belongs to Scotland. It is a UK bank not English despite the name.
"After having been found-out on NATO and EU membership"
I presume because you're quoting that, Carlotta, you're confident that it makes some kind of logical sense? How have the SNP been "found out" on NATO and EU membership? As far as I can see the SNP have openly changed their policy on NATO after a democratic vote, and the unionist position on the EU has imploded as it's become obvious to even the dogs on the street that Scotland has a greater chance of being forcibly ejected from the EU if it votes No to independence.
"To be clear: this is not about England saying that Scotland couldn’t stay in the pound. If we choose to leave the UK, it would be us leaving the UK pound. There is no easy or certain way to get back in. After having been found-out on NATO and EU membership, the SNP should stop pretending that Scotland will automatically inherit things."
Just so we are clear, with 8.4% of the assets and reserves, how much of the Bank of England belongs to Scotland. It is a UK bank not English despite the name.
And an independent Scotland can get 8.4% of the input on Bank of England policy.
"And an independent Scotland can get 8.4% of the input on Bank of England policy."
Cheers, Socrates, that would certainly be a marked improvement on the status quo.
So two out of the last three Chancellors were Scottish, with one of them being responsible for giving the BoE operational independence. Clearly no Scottish influence ...
"So two out of the last three Chancellors were Scottish, with one of them being responsible for giving the BoE operational independence. Clearly no Scottish influence ..."
New Labour policy enacted by the two Chancellors you refer to was a direct product of the need to tailor policy to centre-right Middle England to have the slightest chance of being elected.
Where is the "Scottish input" at present? Please don't say Danny Alexander or I won't stop laughing until 7pm.
Your headline writer needs shooting - or doubts you ever got it off with a Doctor.....
Website headline writers have been trained to do SEO and nothing but SEO which is why headlines are now always rubbish.
If you don't know what SEO is my advice would be to try and never find out.
As for being mustard, I think really you're more like a piece of grit (to create pearls). Were you employed before or after Mackenzie was unceremoniously dumped?
Either Minsters and No.10 know we've avoided a triple dip, or their engaged in the worst expectation management I've ever seen.
Ministers wont get the figures until Wednesday morning.
Yes but, Neil.
Almost all the Public Sector borrowing figures released by the ONS are sourced from the Treasury so they will know to a reasonable degree of accuracy what the PSNBex figures are likely to be.
Also the sources for the GDP 'first estimate' figures are already released for two of the three months in the quarter (albeit accepting that they are eventually calculated using three measurement methodogies), so a reasonable guess can be extrapolated from published stats for Jan and Feb.
Still the GDP figure is on a knife-edge. Someone should be reminding Robert Chote that a knighthood would set him apart from and above his Soho neighbours. Sir Robert would be guaranteed the best table at Patisserie Valerie.
"The last Governor of the Bank of England was appointed by a Scot, for goodness' sake. How does Scotland have any less input than, say, East Anglia?"
What input does East Anglia have?
The same input all parts of the UK have. They elect MPs to parliament, and parliamentary support decides the government that chooses the Governor. Scotland will have far more input on the Bank of England by sending MPs to that parliament than by sending them to another parliament. Whichever candidate the Scottish Chancellor supports won't matter a hoot.
so a reasonable guess can be extrapolated from published "first estimates" for Jan and Feb.
And most people who have looked at them and made reasonable guesses say it's 50:50. Not a great basis for expectations' management! Not that it really matters of course, the bigger picture, that's there's been no growth since Osborne declared our recovery, is far more important.
I cant remember, did Osborne declare us to be out of danger from an aircraft carrier a la Bush and the end of hostilities in Iraq?
"The same input all parts of the UK have. They elect MPs to parliament..."
Precisely my point. Given that Scotland is a "part of the UK" ideologically at odds with the political centre of gravity of the UK as a whole, that means when the parties we vote for are defeated in the south our "input" is not 8%, but 0%. Or perhaps you can explain to me what input the Labour majority we elected in 2010 has at present, or indeed the SNP government we elected in 2011?
"To be clear: this is not about England saying that Scotland couldn’t stay in the pound. If we choose to leave the UK, it would be us leaving the UK pound. There is no easy or certain way to get back in. After having been found-out on NATO and EU membership, the SNP should stop pretending that Scotland will automatically inherit things."
Just so we are clear, with 8.4% of the assets and reserves, how much of the Bank of England belongs to Scotland. It is a UK bank not English despite the name.
And an independent Scotland can get 8.4% of the input on Bank of England policy.
9 seats I think on the board so 11% is pretty close to 8.4%, so probably entitled to almost 1 seat at the table.
"so you want to vote to leave the pound then re-apply for membership, like the EU and Nato?"
As you know, we're not going to leave the EU or NATO, Carlotta (more's the pity in the latter case), so you appear to be talking nonsense again - inadvertently I'm sure.
MartynExpress ...also, myth that Cameron dodges PMQs is false. In Brown's last 34 Harman did 6. In Dave's 95 to date he's only missed 6 (clegg 5, hague 1)
MartynExpress ...also, myth that Cameron dodges PMQs is false. In Brown's last 34 Harman did 6. In Dave's 95 to date he's only missed 6 (clegg 5, hague 1)
The recent charge is not that Cameron sends a replacement (which presumably happens when Parliament is in session on a Wednesday but the PM is unavoidably elsewhere) but that Cameron arranges for Parliament not to be in session on Wednesdays. These stats do not rebut that charge.
"So two out of the last three Chancellors were Scottish, with one of them being responsible for giving the BoE operational independence. Clearly no Scottish influence ..."
New Labour policy enacted by the two Chancellors you refer to was a direct product of the need to tailor policy to centre-right Middle England to have the slightest chance of being elected.
Where is the "Scottish input" at present? Please don't say Danny Alexander or I won't stop laughing until 7pm.
Offtopic - Inverness GE betting market is interesting, LD @ Evens, SNP @ 3-1, Lab @ 5-2 (Ladbrokes)
so a reasonable guess can be extrapolated from published "first estimates" for Jan and Feb.
And most people who have looked at them and made reasonable guesses say it's 50:50. Not a great basis for expectations' management! Not that it really matters of course, the bigger picture, that's there's been no growth since Osborne declared our recovery, is far more important.
I cant remember, did Osborne declare us to be out of danger from an aircraft carrier a la Bush and the end of hostilities in Iraq?
I do trust you read my post on George's statement to the IMF meeting in Washington on the last thread.
He is so pleased with himself for reducing Public Sector net borrowing from 11.2% to 5.6% of GDP in less than three years that he took it upon himself to lecture the US and Japan on their fiscal incontinence.
As for growth, the UK has grown and is growing and is forecast to grow faster than any other large EU country in the period 2010-2015. I would not be surpised if Wednesday's figures show that the gap between UK and US growth is also narrowing.
The funniest thing in what is proving to be much entertainment from the Scottish Nationalists is this latest whinging that, by leaving the UK, they'll no longer be part of it and therefore have no say in its institutions.
"The same input all parts of the UK have. They elect MPs to parliament..."
Precisely my point. Given that Scotland is a "part of the UK" ideologically at odds with the political centre of gravity of the UK as a whole, that means when the parties we vote for are defeated in the south our "input" is not 8%, but 0%. Or perhaps you can explain to me what input the Labour majority we elected in 2010 has at present, or indeed the SNP government we elected in 2011?
Well it depends which bits of Scotland doesn't it? The Lib Dem bits I suppose you'd translate as some influence (along with the Tory MP). It's majority government (and an independent Scotland would have the same issues).
"The funniest thing in what is proving to be much entertainment from the Scottish Nationalists is this latest whinging that, by leaving the UK, they'll no longer be part of it and therefore have no say in its institutions."
Snigger. Whereas at present our "say" over UK institutions consists of Danny Alexander, a man who we are led to believe has even more right-wing views than George Osborne?
I suspect we'll both be laughing all the way to polling day, Richard, but the difference is I'm laughing at something that's actually quite funny.
There can be no UK demos that includes Scotland - we broke decisively from the UK centre of gravity in the 1980s and 1990s, a fact that was underpinned by the majority support for substantial self-government that goes way beyond what we currently have.
ALP - whilst the thought of a triple to single dip in one month is amusing - are all previous results revised every month ? I understood that some of the old data is only updated periodically.
"The same input all parts of the UK have. They elect MPs to parliament..."
Precisely my point. Given that Scotland is a "part of the UK" ideologically at odds with the political centre of gravity of the UK as a whole, that means when the parties we vote for are defeated in the south our "input" is not 8%, but 0%. Or perhaps you can explain to me what input the Labour majority we elected in 2010 has at present, or indeed the SNP government we elected in 2011?
The same input the Conservative majority the home counties elected in 2005 had during the last Labour government. The nature of democracy is that sometimes the other party gets in. I'm pretty certain in an independent Scotland there would be times where the government isn't what Edinburgh voted for. The home counties are ideologically at odds with the political centre of gravity of the UK. It's just that they don't constantly whinge about it.
@JamesKelly - I naively thought that Danny Alexander was elected by 19,172 Scots, giving him a chunky majority over Labour and leaving the SNP a distant third, but obviously this just shows my ignorance of Scottish politics; he must have been appointed to parliament by the hated English Tories.
Thats not the argument, it's that Cameron makes sure Parliament always rises on a Tuesday so PMQs doesn't happen. Hence the fact that there's only 2 in 12 weeks at the moment.
Is that like your 'argument' (and I use that word in the loosest possible sense) that Osborne crying would shape the media narrative?
In which case you showed yourself not only to be out of touch with the media, but also the voters. Including Labour voters.
You've jumped the shark on too many occasions now, Tim.
"Offtopic - Inverness GE betting market is interesting, LD @ Evens, SNP @ 3-1, Lab @ 5-2 (Ladbrokes)
Will you be having a tickle on the SNP, James ?"
If I was a betting man I'd be tempted. There's no way on God's earth Alexander should be evens, and the SNP are more likely than Labour to beat him (as the Ashcroft mega-poll demonstrated).
There can be no UK demos that includes Scotland - we broke decisively from the UK centre of gravity in the 1980s and 1990s, a fact that was underpinned by the majority support for substantial self-government that goes way beyond what we currently have.
The north of England also broke decisively from the UK centre of gravity during the same time. As did most of south England in the opposite direction. These things to and fro. It's just like how California was a swing state in the 1980s and Missouri in the 1990s. You can't always be the centre of attention. Most people don't react to that by wanting to walk off sulking. Thankfully, that includes most Scots.
ALP - whilst the thought of a triple to single dip in one month is amusing - are all previous results revised every month ? I understood that some of the old data is only updated periodically.
There are time limits to the backdating of certain figures (all explained at interminable length in an ONS briefing note), but the current GDP revisions mainly stem from a specific project to introduce a better (or more finely tweaked) methodology for GDP calculations. This meant that the revisions went as far back as feasible to ensure a consistent progression. The main revisions have already been made to the GDP figures but the project isn't complete and further tweaks may yet be made.
The above is all very woolly and the exact dates, project description and impact assessments are all available for download on the ONS site. I am fairly confident though that my high level description is accurate.
"The nature of democracy is that sometimes the other party gets in"
The nature of democracy is that you get a government the majority voted for. Except for viewers in Scotland, naturally.
And of course upholding the democratic principle is "whinging" and "sulking". No wonder the people of Chile "whinged" and "sulked" so much about Mrs Thatcher's support for their fascist dictatorship.
There can be no UK demos that includes Scotland - we broke decisively from the UK centre of gravity in the 1980s and 1990s, a fact that was underpinned by the majority support for substantial self-government that goes way beyond what we currently have.
*shrugs* Very much in the eye of the beholder that one, if you look at election results you can point to long standing divisions between different parts of Scotland electing different parties.
Obviously the final test will be the referendum when it comes around, but given some of the polling you can't state it as an unquestionable fact.
"I naively thought that Danny Alexander was elected by 19,172 Scots, giving him a chunky majority over Labour and leaving the SNP a distant third"
Yes, that's right, Richard - it happened after that referendum in which we delegated our national voting rights to the people of Inverness.
*rolls eyes*
You're getting laughably inconsistent. The UK didn't have a referendum in which they delegated their national voting rights to the people of Scotland either. You could apply all of your arguments on this thread to Inverness in an independent Scotland.
"The nature of democracy is that sometimes the other party gets in"
The nature of democracy is that you get a government the majority voted for. Except for viewers in Scotland, naturally.
Or viewers in Lothian in the last Scottish elections. UK general elections are confirmed as free and fair by international observers. There is no lack of a democratic principle, unlike your crass comparison of Pinochet's Chile.
"The UK didn't have a referendum in which they delegated their national voting rights to the people of Scotland either. You could apply all of your arguments on this thread to Inverness in an independent Scotland."
I presume in Socrates-world that means having proportional voting rights in an international organisation means you have delegated your national voting rights to Angola.
Alternatively, what you've just said doesn't make sense.
"It must have been a very long lunch, Jack. It's now 3.14pm on Monday. "
I specialize in long lunches Nabbers as you well know, although it has to be said not as long as John O's long drinkies that often take a few hundred miles to complete !!
"The UK didn't have a referendum in which they delegated their national voting rights to the people of Scotland either. You could apply all of your arguments on this thread to Inverness in an independent Scotland."
I presume in Socrates-world that means having proportional voting rights in an international organisation means you have delegated your national voting rights to Angola.
Alternatively, what you've just said doesn't make sense.
How many international organisations are there where Angola has more than 90% of the vote?
Come to think of it, JamesKelly is right. In fact, if anything he's dramatically understating the case, given the part Scotland has historically played in the Union. I think a fair share for Scotland's share of the National Debt would be something like 40%.
No, the Thatcher government may have supported the fascist regime in Chile, but it didn't support the North Korean regime. It did of course support the Khmer Rouge, so there was no old-fashioned squeamishness about only supporting murderous dictatorships of the far-right variety.
Come to think of it, JamesKelly is right. In fact, if anything he's dramatically understating the case, given the part Scotland has historically played in the Union. I think a fair share for Scotland's share of the National Debt would be something like 40%.
"How many international organisations are there where Angola has more than 90% of the vote?"
Given that you're suggesting that the UK would be delegating its national voting rights to Scotland by giving us a mere 8% input, you'll have to explain the relevance of your question, because I must admit I'm baffled as to what you're getting at.
This is one of those Scotland/EU arguments where the two are interchangeable except for the people making them. The discussions never go very far because the differences come down to conflicting, adamantly-held views about who has what "demos".
These conflicting concepts of the "demos" can't really be properly resolved because they're just things people pulled out of their arses to try to make it look like they're motivated by democracy, when really they're motivated by nationalism.
Come to think of it, JamesKelly is right. In fact, if anything he's dramatically understating the case, given the part Scotland has historically played in the Union. I think a fair share for Scotland's share of the National Debt would be something like 40%.
The real question, Richard, is whether it would be in the interest of rUK in enter into a banking union with a country liable for the Royal Bank of Scotland Group and the parts of the Lloyds Banking Group registered in Scotland.
"These conflicting concepts of the "demos" can't really be properly resolved because they're just things people pulled out of their arses to try to make it look like they're motivated by democracy"
Alternatively you can look at whether people have expressed a desire for self-government or not (even if they do it "out of their arses" from your perspective, Edmund, you should probably as a democrat still be taking heed).
"The real question, Richard, is whether it would be in the interest of rUK in enter into a banking union with a country liable for the Royal Bank of Scotland Group"
Good thinking, Avery, but it may not be able to entirely avoid going into a banking union with itself.
This is one of those Scotland/EU arguments where the two are interchangeable except for the people making them. The discussions never go very far because the differences come down to conflicting, adamantly-held views about who has what "demos".
These conflicting concepts of the "demos" can't really be properly resolved because they're just things people pulled out of their arses to try to make it look like they're motivated by democracy, when really they're motivated by nationalism.
There's a simple way of measuring demos: asking the people of the territory in discussion which state they want to be part of. In the case of the UK, they don't want to be part of an EU state. In the case of Scotland, they want to be part of the UK.
There was a by-election relatively close to South Shields in Hartlepool in 2004.
In the 2001 general election the Tories had polled 7,935 votes with no UKIP candidate standing.
In 2004 the result for those two parties was UKIP 3,193 and Con 3,044.
That was almost a decade ago, before anyone took UKIP seriously. If UKIP were able to take about 50% of the Tory vote in 2004 they ought to be able to take at least 75% of it in 2013 IMO:
"In the case of the UK, they don't want to be part of an EU state. In the case of Scotland, they want to be part of the UK."
That'll be why Britain voted for membership of Europe in the only referendum we've had on the subject, and why Scotland has never been consulted on whether it wants to be part of the UK?
Oh wait, I think what you mean is - I, Socrates, personally think that the UK should leave the EU, but that Scotland should not leave the UK.
Something must have got lost in translation there.
I don't want to mislead you here - if you think this is some kind of journey that is eventually going to lead me to thinking that Neil's "YELLOW CARD!" catchphrase is comedy genius on a par with Tommy Cooper, you may be disappointed.
But I promise you I am appreciative of humour of the actually amusing variety.
"UK general elections are confirmed as free and fair by international observers"
They are free and fair - and the voters of Middle England freely and fairly get exactly the centre-right government they vote for, every single time.
Just a pity about the rest of us.
A centre-right government that supports a socialist healthcare system, a state-owned monopoly on news broadcasting, unlimited immigration from EU countries, and criminal charges for saying non-PC things on social networks.
"A centre-right government that supports a socialist healthcare system"
If it's currently considered "centrist" in southern England to regard the English NHS as a "socialist healthcare system", I fear you have just proved my point more eloquently than I ever could.
"In the case of the UK, they don't want to be part of an EU state. In the case of Scotland, they want to be part of the UK."
That'll be why Britain voted for membership of Europe in the only referendum we've had on the subject, and why Scotland has never been consulted on whether it wants to be part of the UK?
Oh wait, I think what you mean is - I, Socrates, personally think that the UK should leave the EU, but that Scotland should not leave the UK.
Something must have got lost in translation there.
The 1973 referendum was not a vote on joining a state, it was on being part of a loose economic community. What I'm talking about is virtually every opinion poll in the subject. I actually support having referendums on both. Unfortunately, it looks like the Scots get extra input on the union that Britons won't get on the EU.
"So in this debate Scotland's banknotes are becoming a symbolic hostage. In one of those great ironies of the current constitutional settlement, the UK government is essentially arguing: "you get to keep your pound by keeping the union".
"She is. She has voted Lab and Con in the past and once Lib Dem I think. How does she not qualify as a floating voter ?"
Er, because she's going to vote Conservative in every future election for the rest of her natural life? (While always going through the obligatory "I'm thinking of voting Natural Law again" phase, of course.)
I once voted Lib Dem in a school mock election, and if there had been votes at 16 I'm sure I'd have voted Lib Dem for real, but that doesn't make me a floating voter now.
There's a simple way of measuring demos: asking the people of the territory in discussion which state they want to be part of. In the case of the UK, they don't want to be part of an EU state. In the case of Scotland, they want to be part of the UK.
That makes the concept very dependent on a bunch of extraneous details that may affect the referendum result, like whether some pillock decides to test a new tax on Scotland again, or whether the "yes" side cock up their campaign, or how much oil there is around Scotland and what the oil price looks like it will be. I thought it was supposed to be something a bit more fundamental than that?
<blockquote class="Quote" rel="Socrates"> There's a simple way of measuring demos: asking the people of the territory in discussion which state they want to be part of. In the case of the UK, they don't want to be part of an EU state. In the case of Scotland, they want to be part of the UK.</blockquote>
And yet the polling suggests consistently that Scotland is far more favourable to the EU than is England. What would be your position on demos if in some (extremely hypothetical) future in-out EU referendum, Scotland voted to stay but England/RUK wanted to leave?
Carlotta, could you please explain WHY keeping a particular design of banknote should be considered more important than getting inhuman weapons of mass destruction off our shores? You know, just when you have a spare minute?
"A centre-right government that supports a socialist healthcare system"
If it's currently considered "centrist" in southern England to regard the English NHS as a "socialist healthcare system", I fear you have just proved my point more eloquently than I ever could.
In the NHS, the government owns all the hospitals and employs all the consultants and nurses. It's socialist. Just as it would be a socialist car company if the government owned all its plants and employed all its engineers.
Well, I imagine the preliminary GDP figures for Q1 will get some on here excited though I can't help but feel that the difference between growth of 0.1% and contraction of 0.1% isn't as much as some would have you believe. Either way, it suggests neither catastrophe nor "saplings of growth surging forward in the spring sunshine" as someone (I think we can guess who) proffered the other day.
On matters welfare, I'm reminded that much of the payments go to pensioners or people already in work. The problem with the former is that it would be electoral suicide for any Govenrment to attack pensioners' income. It would invite the wrath of the Mail et al on their heads. Attacking the benefits of those already in work is fraught with risk as is the tackling of universal child benefit.
So we're left tinkering round the edges going after an insignificant minority not tackling the problem but trying to convince ourselves we are. Do I have a solution ? No, and if I did, I'd be running my own consultancy advising western Governments how to sort it out.
Scottish banknotes issued by "the Bank of Scotland, first to do so from 1695, the Royal Bank of Scotland, which began printing notes soon after being founded in 1727, and the Clydesdale, from 1839.....all withdrawn 2016 - its a 'Victory for Eck!'
An Independent Scotland using currency with Bank of England on it - too delicious for words!
Socrates, we seem to have just located the UK branch of "Randians for Obama" . I knew there had to be one.
I see you're engaging in throwing terms about rather than engaging in actual argument. If you have an economic sector in which nearly all the assets are owned by the government, most of the employees are employed by the government, financial allocations are made by the government, and the overall system is responsible to a government minister, how is that not socialist? It's straight out government ownership and control of the means of production. If the English NHS isn't a socialist healthcare system, it's hard to imagine what one would look like.
"I see you're engaging in throwing terms about rather than engaging in actual argument."
Would you listen to yourself, man? You're the one who has just described the NHS as "socialist"! Tell me, does an absolute monarchy become "socialist" just because the government owns all the prisons and employs all the prison guards?
James Chapman (Mail) @jameschappers No10 steps into Suarez furore: football authorities should take into account fact 'high profile players are often role models'
Liz Truss quote: there are toddlers "running around with no sense of purpose".
Shut up. Both of you, just shut up.
I think No 10 may have bitten off more than they can chew with this one, tim.
Comments
DPJHodges Either Minsters and No.10 know we've avoided a triple dip, or their engaged in the worst expectation management I've ever seen.
I presume because you're quoting that, Carlotta, you're confident that it makes some kind of logical sense? How have the SNP been "found out" on NATO and EU membership? As far as I can see the SNP have openly changed their policy on NATO after a democratic vote, and the unionist position on the EU has imploded as it's become obvious to even the dogs on the street that Scotland has a greater chance of being forcibly ejected from the EU if it votes No to independence.
Indeed, I thought it was a bizarre article. There is no way they can know what the figures will be this far in advance
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10009172/Britain-to-avoid-triple-dip-as-recovery-starts-Tories-believe.html
Cheers, Socrates, that would certainly be a marked improvement on the status quo.
So two out of the last three Chancellors were Scottish, with one of them being responsible for giving the BoE operational independence. Clearly no Scottish influence ...
New Labour policy enacted by the two Chancellors you refer to was a direct product of the need to tailor policy to centre-right Middle England to have the slightest chance of being elected.
Where is the "Scottish input" at present? Please don't say Danny Alexander or I won't stop laughing until 7pm.
What input does East Anglia have?
If you don't know what SEO is my advice would be to try and never find out.
As for being mustard, I think really you're more like a piece of grit (to create pearls). Were you employed before or after Mackenzie was unceremoniously dumped?
Almost all the Public Sector borrowing figures released by the ONS are sourced from the Treasury so they will know to a reasonable degree of accuracy what the PSNBex figures are likely to be.
Also the sources for the GDP 'first estimate' figures are already released for two of the three months in the quarter (albeit accepting that they are eventually calculated using three measurement methodogies), so a reasonable guess can be extrapolated from published stats for Jan and Feb.
Still the GDP figure is on a knife-edge. Someone should be reminding Robert Chote that a knighthood would set him apart from and above his Soho neighbours. Sir Robert would be guaranteed the best table at Patisserie Valerie.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/herndon-responds-to-reinhart-rogoff-2013-4#ixzz2RCTUAohq
I cant remember, did Osborne declare us to be out of danger from an aircraft carrier a la Bush and the end of hostilities in Iraq?
Precisely my point. Given that Scotland is a "part of the UK" ideologically at odds with the political centre of gravity of the UK as a whole, that means when the parties we vote for are defeated in the south our "input" is not 8%, but 0%. Or perhaps you can explain to me what input the Labour majority we elected in 2010 has at present, or indeed the SNP government we elected in 2011?
As you know, we're not going to leave the EU or NATO, Carlotta (more's the pity in the latter case), so you appear to be talking nonsense again - inadvertently I'm sure.
Will you be having a tickle on the SNP, James ?
He is so pleased with himself for reducing Public Sector net borrowing from 11.2% to 5.6% of GDP in less than three years that he took it upon himself to lecture the US and Japan on their fiscal incontinence.
As for growth, the UK has grown and is growing and is forecast to grow faster than any other large EU country in the period 2010-2015. I would not be surpised if Wednesday's figures show that the gap between UK and US growth is also narrowing.
The Scottish Government appoints a member, Neil? Cool, I didn't know that.
It all just circles back to demos.
Snigger. Whereas at present our "say" over UK institutions consists of Danny Alexander, a man who we are led to believe has even more right-wing views than George Osborne?
I suspect we'll both be laughing all the way to polling day, Richard, but the difference is I'm laughing at something that's actually quite funny.
We had it for Sunday lunch ....
There can be no UK demos that includes Scotland - we broke decisively from the UK centre of gravity in the 1980s and 1990s, a fact that was underpinned by the majority support for substantial self-government that goes way beyond what we currently have.
In which case you showed yourself not only to be out of touch with the media, but also the voters. Including Labour voters.
You've jumped the shark on too many occasions now, Tim.
Will you be having a tickle on the SNP, James ?"
If I was a betting man I'd be tempted. There's no way on God's earth Alexander should be evens, and the SNP are more likely than Labour to beat him (as the Ashcroft mega-poll demonstrated).
Yes, that's right, Richard - it happened after that referendum in which we delegated our national voting rights to the people of Inverness.
*rolls eyes*
The above is all very woolly and the exact dates, project description and impact assessments are all available for download on the ONS site. I am fairly confident though that my high level description is accurate.
"An independent Scotland would be treated as a "new state" by Nato and have to apply for membership of the defence alliance."
http://news.stv.tv/politics/220906-alex-salmond-told-scotland-would-have-to-apply-for-nato-membership/
"Sturgeon: independent Scotland would have to apply for EU membership"
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/sturgeon-case-for-scotland-remaining-in-eu-is-common-sense.1361898288
The nature of democracy is that you get a government the majority voted for. Except for viewers in Scotland, naturally.
And of course upholding the democratic principle is "whinging" and "sulking". No wonder the people of Chile "whinged" and "sulked" so much about Mrs Thatcher's support for their fascist dictatorship.
Obviously the final test will be the referendum when it comes around, but given some of the polling you can't state it as an unquestionable fact.
I presume in Socrates-world that means having proportional voting rights in an international organisation means you have delegated your national voting rights to Angola.
Alternatively, what you've just said doesn't make sense.
"The nature of democracy is that you get a government the majority voted for."
Huh? Where? In the UK?
"It must have been a very long lunch, Jack. It's now 3.14pm on Monday. "
I specialize in long lunches Nabbers as you well know, although it has to be said not as long as John O's long drinkies that often take a few hundred miles to complete !!
They are free and fair - and the voters of Middle England freely and fairly get exactly the centre-right government they vote for, every single time.
Just a pity about the rest of us.
"Huh? Where? In the UK?"
Good point, well made.
No, the Thatcher government may have supported the fascist regime in Chile, but it didn't support the North Korean regime. It did of course support the Khmer Rouge, so there was no old-fashioned squeamishness about only supporting murderous dictatorships of the far-right variety.
Given that you're suggesting that the UK would be delegating its national voting rights to Scotland by giving us a mere 8% input, you'll have to explain the relevance of your question, because I must admit I'm baffled as to what you're getting at.
These conflicting concepts of the "demos" can't really be properly resolved because they're just things people pulled out of their arses to try to make it look like they're motivated by democracy, when really they're motivated by nationalism.
Makes 40% sound rather generous to me.
Alternatively you can look at whether people have expressed a desire for self-government or not (even if they do it "out of their arses" from your perspective, Edmund, you should probably as a democrat still be taking heed).
Seem fair James ?
I love it. PB Tory is the arbiter of whether PB Tory has beaten a non-PB Tory or not. Sounds about as fair as the UK electoral system...
We've already discussed holding the next PB Tory cocktail party in Cornwall on the basis that JohnO will probably end up there anyway.
Good thinking, Avery, but it may not be able to entirely avoid going into a banking union with itself.
I just thought it was a pretty funny comment. For your benefit:
fun·ny [fuhn-ee]
adjective
1. providing fun; causing amusement or laughter; amusing; comical.
adjective
1. providing fun; causing amusement or laughter; amusing; comical."
I'm familiar with the concept, and I promise you I ponder it at some length every time Plato reminds us that she is a floating voter.
In the 2001 general election the Tories had polled 7,935 votes with no UKIP candidate standing.
In 2004 the result for those two parties was UKIP 3,193 and Con 3,044.
That was almost a decade ago, before anyone took UKIP seriously. If UKIP were able to take about 50% of the Tory vote in 2004 they ought to be able to take at least 75% of it in 2013 IMO:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartlepool_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
That'll be why Britain voted for membership of Europe in the only referendum we've had on the subject, and why Scotland has never been consulted on whether it wants to be part of the UK?
Oh wait, I think what you mean is - I, Socrates, personally think that the UK should leave the EU, but that Scotland should not leave the UK.
Something must have got lost in translation there.
I don't want to mislead you here - if you think this is some kind of journey that is eventually going to lead me to thinking that Neil's "YELLOW CARD!" catchphrase is comedy genius on a par with Tommy Cooper, you may be disappointed.
But I promise you I am appreciative of humour of the actually amusing variety.
If it's currently considered "centrist" in southern England to regard the English NHS as a "socialist healthcare system", I fear you have just proved my point more eloquently than I ever could.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/scottish-independence-blog/2013/apr/22/scottish-independence-banknotes
Er, because she's going to vote Conservative in every future election for the rest of her natural life? (While always going through the obligatory "I'm thinking of voting Natural Law again" phase, of course.)
I once voted Lib Dem in a school mock election, and if there had been votes at 16 I'm sure I'd have voted Lib Dem for real, but that doesn't make me a floating voter now.
There's a simple way of measuring demos: asking the people of the territory in discussion which state they want to be part of. In the case of the UK, they don't want to be part of an EU state. In the case of Scotland, they want to be part of the UK.</blockquote>
And yet the polling suggests consistently that Scotland is far more favourable to the EU than is England. What would be your position on demos if in some (extremely hypothetical) future in-out EU referendum, Scotland voted to stay but England/RUK wanted to leave?
That's fine, we haven't joined one.
Swinney - banknotes scare story "an insult"
http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2013/apr/swinney-banknotes-scare-story-insult
Well, I imagine the preliminary GDP figures for Q1 will get some on here excited though I can't help but feel that the difference between growth of 0.1% and contraction of 0.1% isn't as much as some would have you believe. Either way, it suggests neither catastrophe nor "saplings of growth surging forward in the spring sunshine" as someone (I think we can guess who) proffered the other day.
On matters welfare, I'm reminded that much of the payments go to pensioners or people already in work. The problem with the former is that it would be electoral suicide for any Govenrment to attack pensioners' income. It would invite the wrath of the Mail et al on their heads. Attacking the benefits of those already in work is fraught with risk as is the tackling of universal child benefit.
So we're left tinkering round the edges going after an insignificant minority not tackling the problem but trying to convince ourselves we are. Do I have a solution ? No, and if I did, I'd be running my own consultancy advising western Governments how to sort it out.
An Independent Scotland using currency with Bank of England on it - too delicious for words!
For starters your question proceeds from assumptions I do not share....
Would you listen to yourself, man? You're the one who has just described the NHS as "socialist"! Tell me, does an absolute monarchy become "socialist" just because the government owns all the prisons and employs all the prison guards?