The Scottish Politics Thread

[clydecloggie]

The short answer to this is that it would be silly to agree to a referendum in the immediate economic aftermath of Brexit (although the Covid recession to an extent going to mask this) or when the 'vote leave'/Johnson government is in charge.

It will be politically challenging to hold the line if the SNP win a absolute majority next spring but legally and in constitutional terms there is no obligation to enable a secession referendum. I also suspect that sooner or later the lunatic wing of the SNP will depose Sturgeon (or she'll go to an NGO somewhere) if she doesn't deliver a Catalan style vote (and to her credit I don't think she will) and I think a lot of support for the SNP and independence hangs on her perceived credibility.

See, I'm not as convinced of that as you are. She has nothing to do with my thoughts on the matter. We used to hear it was all a personality cult around Salmond and that once he'd gone the number in favour of independence would fall as well. Didn't happen.

I am thinking about the 10%ish of voters who are swinging the polls at the moment rather than people like us with entrenched views.

I am not sure there are that many swing voters, i.e. folk who change their mind multiple times and go back and forth. I think the analysis of 2014 showed that it was head over heart for a lot of people - emotionally, they wanted to vote for independence but rationally they didn't like the risk assessment and went with No. That risk assessment has changed considerably, mainly due to the unravelling of the Unionist offer. So a lot of folk now have the freedom to follow their heart - and usually there's not an awful lot of turning back from that. With that last poll saying 58%, herd mentality and wanting to be on the winning side might start playing a part as well - or less cynically put, "if 60% of Scots support it it's unlikely to be a bad idea" type thinking.

[Tichtheid]

And that is fair enough, i am sure there are good number of people that voted for Brexit that felt along similar lines, not wanting to be part of the EU where they were a minority vote against the Franco German bloc, didnt want decisions forced on them from Brussels etc etc.

I'd pick up this one thing on a point of order,



from Full Fact

Official EU voting records* show that the British government has voted ‘No’ to laws passed at EU level on 56 occasions, abstained 70 times, and voted ‘Yes’ 2,466 times since 1999, according to UK in a Changing Europe Fellows Sara Hagemann and Simon Hix.

In other words, UK ministers were on the “winning side” 95% of the time, abstained 3% of the time, and were on the losing side 2%.

It’s the perception that matters to these voters to how they feel. They undoubtedly didn’t feel the UK government represented them when they have enacted these laws, similar to how you have expressed yourself.

They were mistaken, and it's not surprising given how much absolute guff has been spouted about the EU since the 70s - no one could possibly argue that Ireland, France, Spain, Germany etc aren't independent countries, that they don't elect their own governments, raise their own taxes, have their own defences, own embassies abroad etc and are accountable to themselves.

The UK even has the exceptionalism of never having to join the Eurozone - off the top of my head I think only Denmark is in that same category (their may be others but I don't think so), the UK always was an independent bloc of countries.

On the other hand, Scotland hasn't returned a Conservative majority of MPs since the fifties, by the next GE it will be coming up for seventy years and it doesn't look like the Tories will be winning a majority vote in Scotland for a long time to come. Having said that, this isn't about party politics in the slightest, I offer that in contrast to how the UK voting record fits in with the EU

[Slick]

And that is fair enough, i am sure there are good number of people that voted for Brexit that felt along similar lines, not wanting to be part of the EU where they were a minority vote against the Franco German bloc, didnt want decisions forced on them from Brussels etc etc.

I'd pick up this one thing on a point of order,



from Full Fact

Official EU voting records* show that the British government has voted ‘No’ to laws passed at EU level on 56 occasions, abstained 70 times, and voted ‘Yes’ 2,466 times since 1999, according to UK in a Changing Europe Fellows Sara Hagemann and Simon Hix.

In other words, UK ministers were on the “winning side” 95% of the time, abstained 3% of the time, and were on the losing side 2%.

It’s the perception that matters to these voters to how they feel. They undoubtedly didn’t feel the UK government represented them when they have enacted these laws, similar to how you have expressed yourself.

Well quite. Years of grievance politics, blaming the EU for anything that goes wrong in the UK, hamming it up in the European Parliament and blind ignorance can do that.

Apparently.

[Slick]

See, I'm not as convinced of that as you are. She has nothing to do with my thoughts on the matter. We used to hear it was all a personality cult around Salmond and that once he'd gone the number in favour of independence would fall as well. Didn't happen.

I am thinking about the 10%ish of voters who are swinging the polls at the moment rather than people like us with entrenched views.

I am not sure there are that many swing voters, i.e. folk who change their mind multiple times and go back and forth. I think the analysis of 2014 showed that it was head over heart for a lot of people - emotionally, they wanted to vote for independence but rationally they didn't like the risk assessment and went with No. That risk assessment has changed considerably, mainly due to the unravelling of the Unionist offer. So a lot of folk now have the freedom to follow their heart - and usually there's not an awful lot of turning back from that. With that last poll saying 58%, herd mentality and wanting to be on the winning side might start playing a part as well - or less cynically put, "if 60% of Scots support it it's unlikely to be a bad idea" type thinking.

I think that's pretty good analysis actually.

From a personal point of view I couldn't vote last time as I lived in England (where I did for the vast majority of my life) but followed it all and on voting day struggled to make up my mind having been very much NO throughout. In the end i went NO (in my head).

After moving up here 4 years ago my NO hardened after discoving how utterly shite the government are, how poor the civil service is and how much the issue holds back and dominates Scotland. Now, I must admit, having lived here for longer, I see how much Scotland is an after thought to the UK government and am so against Brexit that I might waver again. There is certainly an element of fuck it if 60% of the country wants it.

[tc27]

See, I'm not as convinced of that as you are. She has nothing to do with my thoughts on the matter. We used to hear it was all a personality cult around Salmond and that once he'd gone the number in favour of independence would fall as well. Didn't happen.

I am thinking about the 10%ish of voters who are swinging the polls at the moment rather than people like us with entrenched views.

I am not sure there are that many swing voters, i.e. folk who change their mind multiple times and go back and forth. I think the analysis of 2014 showed that it was head over heart for a lot of people - emotionally, they wanted to vote for independence but rationally they didn't like the risk assessment and went with No. That risk assessment has changed considerably, mainly due to the unravelling of the Unionist offer. So a lot of folk now have the freedom to follow their heart - and usually there's not an awful lot of turning back from that. With that last poll saying 58%, herd mentality and wanting to be on the winning side might start playing a part as well - or less cynically put, "if 60% of Scots support it it's unlikely to be a bad idea" type thinking.

The 'unionist offer' last time was mainly pointing out how terrible the economic case for independence was last time and at the last minute offering more devolution. The first is still true and the second was delivered.

I think its premature to bank all those recent yes poll responses BTW - the evidence from focus groups really does seem to show that its an intense dislike of BJ and the perceived credibility of NS thats driving it...also most are deeply concerned about economics and currency and the SNP still have no answer to this other than to proffer sterlingisation and hope none reads up on it.

[clydecloggie]

I am thinking about the 10%ish of voters who are swinging the polls at the moment rather than people like us with entrenched views.

I am not sure there are that many swing voters, i.e. folk who change their mind multiple times and go back and forth. I think the analysis of 2014 showed that it was head over heart for a lot of people - emotionally, they wanted to vote for independence but rationally they didn't like the risk assessment and went with No. That risk assessment has changed considerably, mainly due to the unravelling of the Unionist offer. So a lot of folk now have the freedom to follow their heart - and usually there's not an awful lot of turning back from that. With that last poll saying 58%, herd mentality and wanting to be on the winning side might start playing a part as well - or less cynically put, "if 60% of Scots support it it's unlikely to be a bad idea" type thinking.

The 'unionist offer' last time was mainly pointing out how terrible the economic case for independence was last time and at the last minute offering more devolution. The first is still true and the second was delivered.

I think its premature to bank all those recent yes poll responses BTW - the evidence from focus groups really does seem to show that its an intense dislike of BJ and the perceived credibility of NS thats driving it...also most are deeply concerned about economics and currency and the SNP still have no answer to this other than to proffer sterlingisation and hope none reads up on it.

1) The UK economic offer is now also demonstrably terrible - from a clear advantage to the Union the economic argument is fast becoming a scoreless draw.

2) More devolution was not demonstrably delivered, and even if it was, the Internal Markets Bill rides roughshod over it. Don't believe me, believe Lord Hope of Craighead, who despite being a Lord knows exactly what he's talking about. (With bonus points for his magnificent way of saying hyperbole)

3) It would be extremely Scottish to lose from a winning position by making daft decisions. Offering Sterlingisation would be akin to 'aye, let's call this line out to the back, we're home and dry in this RWC QF anyway'. A Scottish currency, with a Scottish central bank, is the only viable way forward and needs to be cemented into the minds of the voters.

[Northern Lights]

I'd pick up this one thing on a point of order,



from Full Fact

It’s the perception that matters to these voters to how they feel. They undoubtedly didn’t feel the UK government represented them when they have enacted these laws, similar to how you have expressed yourself.

Well quite. Years of grievance politics, blaming the EU for anything that goes wrong in the UK, hamming it up in the European Parliament and blind ignorance can do that.

Apparently.

Not just the Brexiteers who indulge in this and it clearly effective as a tool to get people into your camp.

[Northern Lights]

I'd pick up this one thing on a point of order,



from Full Fact

It’s the perception that matters to these voters to how they feel. They undoubtedly didn’t feel the UK government represented them when they have enacted these laws, similar to how you have expressed yourself.

They were mistaken, and it's not surprising given how much absolute guff has been spouted about the EU since the 70s - no one could possibly argue that Ireland, France, Spain, Germany etc aren't independent countries, that they don't elect their own governments, raise their own taxes, have their own defences, own embassies abroad etc and are accountable to themselves.

The UK even has the exceptionalism of never having to join the Eurozone - off the top of my head I think only Denmark is in that same category (their may be others but I don't think so), the UK always was an independent bloc of countries.

On the other hand, Scotland hasn't returned a Conservative majority of MPs since the fifties, by the next GE it will be coming up for seventy years and it doesn't look like the Tories will be winning a majority vote in Scotland for a long time to come. Having said that, this isn't about party politics in the slightest, I offer that in contrast to how the UK voting record fits in with the EU

So when Labour were in power we were aligned? It's only been the last 13 years since the Labour vote collapsed that the SNP have been so strong, the Labour bloc has moved to them, not that i see that reversing anytime soon, what once was nailed on Labour votes are the same for the SNP irrespective of performance. Same is true of tory votes, there are a hard core that will vote for them regardless.

I do agree they were mistaken, same as i view Indy supporters, I believe they are mistaken and there is an awful lot of guff spouted and demonisation of Westminster, there are a lot of similarities between the Brexiteers and the Indy supporters.

[Tichtheid]

It’s the perception that matters to these voters to how they feel. They undoubtedly didn’t feel the UK government represented them when they have enacted these laws, similar to how you have expressed yourself.

They were mistaken, and it's not surprising given how much absolute guff has been spouted about the EU since the 70s - no one could possibly argue that Ireland, France, Spain, Germany etc aren't independent countries, that they don't elect their own governments, raise their own taxes, have their own defences, own embassies abroad etc and are accountable to themselves.

The UK even has the exceptionalism of never having to join the Eurozone - off the top of my head I think only Denmark is in that same category (their may be others but I don't think so), the UK always was an independent bloc of countries.

On the other hand, Scotland hasn't returned a Conservative majority of MPs since the fifties, by the next GE it will be coming up for seventy years and it doesn't look like the Tories will be winning a majority vote in Scotland for a long time to come. Having said that, this isn't about party politics in the slightest, I offer that in contrast to how the UK voting record fits in with the EU

So when Labour were in power we were aligned?

I feel you have missed the point, it doesn't matter how Scotland votes, we get the Government that England votes for - a very different scenario from the UK's very successful negotiators' record at the EU, ie only 2% of the votes the UK cast were on the "losing" side.

The make up of the UK and the EU is very different, I'm surprised I have to say this.

I do agree they were mistaken, same as i view Indy supporters, I believe they are mistaken and there is an awful lot of guff spouted and demonisation of Westminster, there are a lot of similarities between the Brexiteers and the Indy supporters.

Nope, all swans are birds but not all birds are swans, voting to leave the UK when it doesn't matter how you vote in the UK elections is not similar to voting to leave a union of independent states where your representatives have negotiated and voted so successfully.

[Northern Lights]

I am not sure there are that many swing voters, i.e. folk who change their mind multiple times and go back and forth. I think the analysis of 2014 showed that it was head over heart for a lot of people - emotionally, they wanted to vote for independence but rationally they didn't like the risk assessment and went with No. That risk assessment has changed considerably, mainly due to the unravelling of the Unionist offer. So a lot of folk now have the freedom to follow their heart - and usually there's not an awful lot of turning back from that. With that last poll saying 58%, herd mentality and wanting to be on the winning side might start playing a part as well - or less cynically put, "if 60% of Scots support it it's unlikely to be a bad idea" type thinking.

The 'unionist offer' last time was mainly pointing out how terrible the economic case for independence was last time and at the last minute offering more devolution. The first is still true and the second was delivered.

I think its premature to bank all those recent yes poll responses BTW - the evidence from focus groups really does seem to show that its an intense dislike of BJ and the perceived credibility of NS thats driving it...also most are deeply concerned about economics and currency and the SNP still have no answer to this other than to proffer sterlingisation and hope none reads up on it.

1) The UK economic offer is now also demonstrably terrible - from a clear advantage to the Union the economic argument is fast becoming a scoreless draw.

That is just wrong I'm afraid, the rest of the UK is still by far our largest export market accounting for something like 60% of all exports. The UK will be weakened post Brexit (and Covid) but to say the economic argument is much of a muchness, I'm afraid is just wrong.

2) More devolution was not demonstrably delivered, and even if it was, the Internal Markets Bill rides roughshod over it. Don't believe me, believe Lord Hope of Craighead, who despite being a Lord knows exactly what he's talking about. (With bonus points for his magnificent way of saying hyperbole)

The issue here is that the SG have not even taken on some of the powers it has been granted such as the benefits system which at the last count it has been delayed to 2024, this isnt Westminster obstruction or not passing the powers, this is our capability to handle them. It's all well and good demanding more devolution but it is a bit rich when we cant handle it and if we cant handle this it should definitely give pause for thought on our current capability to gear up to run things as an Independent country, quite simply our civil service in Scotland are not very good and that is me being polite.

3) It would be extremely Scottish to lose from a winning position by making daft decisions. Offering Sterlingisation would be akin to 'aye, let's call this line out to the back, we're home and dry in this RWC QF anyway'. A Scottish currency, with a Scottish central bank, is the only viable way forward and needs to be cemented into the minds of the voters.

This is not what is being proposed by Wilson, the architect behind the economic case, so it is sterlingisation that will be presented to the voters making the choice. I dont disagree with you by the way if that is the route we are going it should be to have our own currency etc not that it will be easy and i expect the smackeroonie to take a kicking in the fx markets until we get our deficit under control which will be the biggest hurdle to establishing credibility.

Apologies for the shite quoting, hopefully you can break out my points that shouldnt be attributable to you.

[Tichtheid]

we get the Government that England votes for

I said the above, and whilst it's true, it is still not the real reason for Scotland to become independent, there is a difference between that statement and wanting Scotland to elect its own government and be accountable to ourselves.

[Northern Lights]

They were mistaken, and it's not surprising given how much absolute guff has been spouted about the EU since the 70s - no one could possibly argue that Ireland, France, Spain, Germany etc aren't independent countries, that they don't elect their own governments, raise their own taxes, have their own defences, own embassies abroad etc and are accountable to themselves.

The UK even has the exceptionalism of never having to join the Eurozone - off the top of my head I think only Denmark is in that same category (their may be others but I don't think so), the UK always was an independent bloc of countries.

On the other hand, Scotland hasn't returned a Conservative majority of MPs since the fifties, by the next GE it will be coming up for seventy years and it doesn't look like the Tories will be winning a majority vote in Scotland for a long time to come. Having said that, this isn't about party politics in the slightest, I offer that in contrast to how the UK voting record fits in with the EU

So when Labour were in power we were aligned?

I feel you have missed the point, it doesn't matter how Scotland votes, we get the Government that England votes for - a very different scenario from the UK's very successful negotiators' record at the EU, ie only 2% of the votes the UK cast were on the "losing" side.

The make up of the UK and the EU is very different, I'm surprised I have to say this.

I do agree they were mistaken, same as i view Indy supporters, I believe they are mistaken and there is an awful lot of guff spouted and demonisation of Westminster, there are a lot of similarities between the Brexiteers and the Indy supporters.

Nope, all swans are birds but not all birds are swans, voting to leave the UK when it doesn't matter how you vote in the UK elections is not similar to voting to leave a union of independent states where your representatives have negotiated and voted so successfully.

Hmmm, the UK was in a minority position at the EU, same as Scotland is within the UK. Do you even agree with this before we get into which way the UK or Scotland successfully implements law or can be seen to agree with the decision made as that is really comparing apples with oranges?

The drivers behind separation in both camps are very similar, disenfranchisment from the voting base.

[Northern Lights]

we get the Government that England votes for

I said the above, and whilst it's true, it is still not the real reason for Scotland to become independent, there is a difference between that statement and wanting Scotland to elect its own government and be accountable to ourselves.

Where we draw a line on the map doesnt matter as much to me, we participate in elections across the whole of the UK for the establishment of a UK parliment which are still accountable to the electorate. There are large parts of England that havent voted Tory and if it wasnt for Corbyn would still have not voted Tory in other large parts of the country.

[Tichtheid]

Hmmm, the UK was in a minority position at the EU, same as Scotland is within the UK. Do you even agree with this before we get into which way the UK or Scotland successfully implements law or can be seen to agree with the decision made as that is really comparing apples with oranges?

I don't agree with that, no, because the two have completely different ways of working and are set up as two incomparable entities - where people were moaning about unaccountability in the EU they were moaning about what is in effect the civil service - our civil service is not voted in either, but that doesn't seem to matter.
The MEPs stand for election just like MSPs and MPs do.

Which leads me to..

The drivers behind separation in both camps are very similar, disenfranchisment from the voting base.

The disenfranchisement, particularly north of Watford was real, austerity was real, what the Leave campaign managed to do was make the voters blame the EU, and turn inward and blame people who were either worse off or were in fact net contributors to the UK economy

The political disenfranchisement, or the democratic deficit in Scotland, is real, but it's not the same thing at all as happened in England, where the vote there decided Scotland's course over the coming years.

[clydecloggie]

So when Labour were in power we were aligned?

I feel you have missed the point, it doesn't matter how Scotland votes, we get the Government that England votes for - a very different scenario from the UK's very successful negotiators' record at the EU, ie only 2% of the votes the UK cast were on the "losing" side.

The make up of the UK and the EU is very different, I'm surprised I have to say this.

I do agree they were mistaken, same as i view Indy supporters, I believe they are mistaken and there is an awful lot of guff spouted and demonisation of Westminster, there are a lot of similarities between the Brexiteers and the Indy supporters.

Nope, all swans are birds but not all birds are swans, voting to leave the UK when it doesn't matter how you vote in the UK elections is not similar to voting to leave a union of independent states where your representatives have negotiated and voted so successfully.

Hmmm, the UK was in a minority position at the EU, same as Scotland is within the UK. Do you even agree with this before we get into which way the UK or Scotland successfully implements law or can be seen to agree with the decision made as that is really comparing apples with oranges?

The drivers behind separation in both camps are very similar, disenfranchisment from the voting base.

I don't think it's fair to equate UK in the EU with Scotland in the UK.

The EU is a collaboration between independent countries, who have huge autonomy in setting their own policies around e.g. health care, defence, education, social security, culture and the economy. A number of them decided to combine their fiscal policy in the Euro zone, but others didn't and crucially were allowed to. And that's key - the EU works on unanimous decisions and where these are not possible, countries are allowed to opt out. The UK famously had the most opt outs of every member.

Scotland has limited devolved autonomy in some of those policy areas but crucially has no veto rights or opt outs for UK-wide policy it disagrees with.

Essentially, if it were the same thing, the UK would have had to join the Euro because Germany, France, Spain and Italy decided it was the right way forward.

[tc27]

And that's key - the EU works on unanimous decisions and where these are not possible, countries are allowed to opt out. The UK famously had the most opt outs of every member.

For a start this is completely wrong. The EU does not have a requirement for unanimity or veto's - decisions are taken on the basis of QMV voting in the Council. Directives from the Commission and decisions by the ECJ automatically become law in member states.

The EU is a collaboration between independent countries, who have huge autonomy in setting their own policies around e.g. health care, defence, education, social security, culture and the economy.

The EU is not (yet) a unitary state, the UK is so I find this comparison somewhat pointless. The EU is also clearly on a trajectory to making all those areas eventually EU competences.

[tc27]

1) The UK economic offer is now also demonstrably terrible - from a clear advantage to the Union the economic argument is fast becoming a scoreless draw.

What its your evidence for a scoreless draw? - I would contend that secession is going to be far worse not just in terms of GDP (leaving the UK internal market for more damaging for trade then leaving the EU for Scottish business) but the other major issues like currency, loss of fiscal transfer and start-up costs for the new state are all problems not shared with brexit.

2) More devolution was not demonstrably delivered, and even if it was, the Internal Markets Bill rides roughshod over it. Don't believe me, believe Lord Hope of Craighead, who despite being a Lord knows exactly what he's talking about. (With bonus points for his magnificent way of saying hyperbole)

The devolution promised in 2014 was delivered: https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/poli ... s-13968479

(however personally I think it was an awful way to manage constitutional affairs).

Can you indicate a previous area the Scottish parliament legislated on that is being removed by the IM bill?

3) It would be extremely Scottish to lose from a winning position by making daft decisions. Offering Sterlingisation would be akin to 'aye, let's call this line out to the back, we're home and dry in this RWC QF anyway'. A Scottish currency, with a Scottish central bank, is the only viable way forward and needs to be cemented into the minds of the voters.
Top

A new currency is the only viable option ultimately but the SNP wont get over 50% if go with this option because the consequences are pretty frightening for anyone dependant on the state or with debts in sterling and anyone with capital will move it out of Scotland.

[Biffer]

The EU has a mix of qualified majority and unanimity depending on the area. You're both right and you're both wrong.

[tc27]

The EU has a mix of qualified majority and unanimity depending on the area. You're both right and you're both wrong.

Yes I happily stand corrected - unanimity required in some reserved areas:

The latest amendment to the treaties, the Lisbon Treaty, which came into force in 2009, increased the number of areas where qualified majority voting in the Council applies.

Nevertheless, a limited number of policies judged to be sensitive remain subject to unanimity voting: taxation, social security or social protection, the accession of new countries to the EU, foreign and common defence policy and operational police cooperation between EU countries.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/gloss ... egislation.

[clydecloggie]

I'll stand corrected too then - honestly thought the list of areas where unanimity is required was longer than that.

[Slick]

Is it just an extension of the current COVID rules or are there any new ones in place?

Asking for a friend that’s meant to be going on holiday internally on Saturday!!

[Northern Lights]

Is it just an extension of the current COVID rules or are there any new ones in place?

Asking for a friend that’s meant to be going on holiday internally on Saturday!!

An extension until the new 5 tier system comes in from what I’ve read, no further restrictions (yet).

[westport]

Boris Johnson introduces a 3 tier Covid system and it's called ‘chaotic and unworkable’. Nicola Sturgeon has 5 tiers and she's the saviour of the free world

[Slick]

Some pretty big jumps in hospitalisations and ICU today it seems. 928 in hospital up from 556 on the 18th and 74 from 43 yesterday, respectively.

[westport]

If she took the same action in the West, when it started to rise quickly, as she did in Aberdeen, it probably wouldn't be as bad now,

[dpedin]

If she took the same action in the West, when it started to rise quickly, as she did in Aberdeen, it probably wouldn't be as bad now,

Reason for spread was different. In Aberdeen it was traced back to spreading in pubs whereas in the West the issue was spread via folk going to each others homes and spreading it that way. Easier to lock down pubs and clubs in Aberdeen that trying to stop people visiting family and friends and having a cup of tea or a few drinks behind closed curtains in the West. I think most spread is now within families or households now? Having said that locking down earlier, even with less adherence, is always going to slow down the virus.

[dpedin]

Some pretty big jumps in hospitalisations and ICU today it seems. 928 in hospital up from 556 on the 18th and 74 from 43 yesterday, respectively.

The figures look scary and are tracking the reasonable worst case modelling previously carried out. If the fire break/lock down doesn't work then we are looking at a pretty scary peak of cases in the 2nd wave in December with a peak demand for beds and ICU beds over festive period, hence extension of the lock down by another week. Even if it is successful the numbers will still be very significant. Hopefully masks, distancing, etc will reduce the spread of colds, flus and respiratory illnesses below the usual levels? NHS is already expanding covid bed and ICU capacity but the impact on elective work is going to be significant. Biggest worry this time round wont be beds, ventilators or PPE but staff and if they can cope again with the stress and strain of it all. They've only just got over the last wave.

Just as well we don't have a No Deal Brexit happening at the same time and possibly huge disruption to the supply chains for drugs, chemicals, food, essential consumer items, etc. Oh wait ... shit!

[Tattie]

I think the MSM up here need to have a long, hard look at themselves. Headlines stating that Sturgeon is sacrificing the hospitality industry and, no doubt, photoshops of Jason Leitch as The Grinch that stole Christmas on the front page of tomorrow’s rags.

Totally irresponsible trying to stoke resentment when cases and deaths are increasing at an alarming rate, despite the measures in place. Give it a few weeks for the peak and they’ll do a u-turn and blame NS and the SG for not shutting down earlier/more severely. Arseholes.

[Slick]

Some pretty big jumps in hospitalisations and ICU today it seems. 928 in hospital up from 556 on the 18th and 74 from 43 yesterday, respectively.

The figures look scary and are tracking the reasonable worst case modelling previously carried out. If the fire break/lock down doesn't work then we are looking at a pretty scary peak of cases in the 2nd wave in December with a peak demand for beds and ICU beds over festive period, hence extension of the lock down by another week. Even if it is successful the numbers will still be very significant. Hopefully masks, distancing, etc will reduce the spread of colds, flus and respiratory illnesses below the usual levels? NHS is already expanding covid bed and ICU capacity but the impact on elective work is going to be significant. Biggest worry this time round wont be beds, ventilators or PPE but staff and if they can cope again with the stress and strain of it all. They've only just got over the last wave.

Just as well we don't have a No Deal Brexit happening at the same time and possibly huge disruption to the supply chains for drugs, chemicals, food, essential consumer items, etc. Oh wait ... shit!

That’s a pretty scary post, dpedin.

[Biffer]

There are signs the restrictions are working in some areas, hopefully the others will follow. Edinburgh’s cases per 100,000 are about 30% down on a fortnight ago. Glasgow, Falkirk, North and South Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, South Lanarkshire all look like they’re levelling off or starting to. West Lothian, North Lanarkshire still on the up though. The next week of numbers is critical, but they Should start to reflect the actions of a fortnight ago. Hospitalisations will keep increasing for another three weeks or so. Deaths for at least a month.

[Northern Lights]

If she took the same action in the West, when it started to rise quickly, as she did in Aberdeen, it probably wouldn't be as bad now,

Reason for spread was different. In Aberdeen it was traced back to spreading in pubs whereas in the West the issue was spread via folk going to each others homes and spreading it that way. Easier to lock down pubs and clubs in Aberdeen that trying to stop people visiting family and friends and having a cup of tea or a few drinks behind closed curtains in the West. I think most spread is now within families or households now? Having said that locking down earlier, even with less adherence, is always going to slow down the virus.

The restrictions to Aberdeen were not just the pubs where the initial outbreak happened. The local restricitons also included not meeting other housholds indoors and a travel limit of not more than 5 miles, care home visits were for only essential visits, so we were stopped from visiting family and friends as well. The SG were slow to act with the outbreak in Glasgow, didnt impose the same level of restrictions irrespective of where the initial outbreak occured, the two cities were treated very differently and we have seen what has happened with the explosion of cases across the whole of the central belt from not imposing the same level of lockdown. I suspect they were trying a different approach to see if they could bring it under control with less onerous restrictions and keep more of the economy open as there was a pretty big backlash in Aberdeen to the restrictions, it clearly didnt work and i am sure they are regretting not closing down tighter when they had the chance.

The test & trace system clearly isnt working the way that it is meant to and is at the moment overwhelmed by the sheer number of cases, the encouraging news as Biffer has just said is that it appears to be levelling off in terms of daily new cases and not increasing exponentially, will see how the NHS copes in due course, the deaths being reported will be magnified by the fact it is now into some care homes again and we know they have a high mortality rate.

[robmatic]

Some pretty big jumps in hospitalisations and ICU today it seems. 928 in hospital up from 556 on the 18th and 74 from 43 yesterday, respectively.

There's only a couple of hundred ICU beds in Scotland, isn't there? Doesn't bode well for the winter, when we're still a couple of months away from peak respiratory disease season.

[Slick]

Some pretty big jumps in hospitalisations and ICU today it seems. 928 in hospital up from 556 on the 18th and 74 from 43 yesterday, respectively.

There's only a couple of hundred ICU beds in Scotland, isn't there? Doesn't bode well for the winter, when we're still a couple of months away from peak respiratory disease season.

This was from June:

Boards now have the capability to provide 585 ICU beds, increased from 173, and continue to plan towards being able to quadruple capacity to more than 700 beds if required.

I also saw that we have 13,000 normal beds so that is also obviously a concern.

[dpedin]

If she took the same action in the West, when it started to rise quickly, as she did in Aberdeen, it probably wouldn't be as bad now,

Reason for spread was different. In Aberdeen it was traced back to spreading in pubs whereas in the West the issue was spread via folk going to each others homes and spreading it that way. Easier to lock down pubs and clubs in Aberdeen that trying to stop people visiting family and friends and having a cup of tea or a few drinks behind closed curtains in the West. I think most spread is now within families or households now? Having said that locking down earlier, even with less adherence, is always going to slow down the virus.

The restrictions to Aberdeen were not just the pubs where the initial outbreak happened. The local restricitons also included not meeting other housholds indoors and a travel limit of not more than 5 miles, care home visits were for only essential visits, so we were stopped from visiting family and friends as well. The SG were slow to act with the outbreak in Glasgow, didnt impose the same level of restrictions irrespective of where the initial outbreak occured, the two cities were treated very differently and we have seen what has happened with the explosion of cases across the whole of the central belt from not imposing the same level of lockdown. I suspect they were trying a different approach to see if they could bring it under control with less onerous restrictions and keep more of the economy open as there was a pretty big backlash in Aberdeen to the restrictions, it clearly didnt work and i am sure they are regretting not closing down tighter when they had the chance.

The test & trace system clearly isnt working the way that it is meant to and is at the moment overwhelmed by the sheer number of cases, the encouraging news as Biffer has just said is that it appears to be levelling off in terms of daily new cases and not increasing exponentially, will see how the NHS copes in due course, the deaths being reported will be magnified by the fact it is now into some care homes again and we know they have a high mortality rate.

I think we are probably agreeing, sort of? Central belt spread is predominately about pop density and levels of deprivation etc. plus the impact of students going back to Uni and spread unfortunately now reaching some care homes again.

However I would disagree about the Test and Protect system - in Scotland it is a combination of the serco run national lighthouse system and local Health Boards and PH teams provision. The national serco testing system isn't working and is failing badly. The testing provision and tracing system run by HBs seems to be working well with quicker turnaround times and far higher levels of tracing and self isolation than the privatised call centre system down south is achieving. There are still some problems with ongoing testing provision in care homes. There were however problems in getting the info on positive cases transferred from the national serco run testing & lighthouse labs system back into HBs quickly and accurately enough, this caused real problems with the tracking process. The benefit of local TaP system is that the HBs can analyse the positive case data, down to individual post code level, in great detail and tie in into other data they have to target actions required. They are doing this daily and are able to respond very, very quickly. However it does depend upon folk getting tested promptly and results being turned around quickly and the serco testing via drive in and home testing is still failing to hit the targets required. I suspect we will see Scotland expanding its own lab capacity and begin to reduce its use of the national system over time cause it aint working.

[Caley_Red]

Christmas 'cancelled' according to front pages. Suspect they'll reverse that; the 'representative' sample from my home watsapp groups demonstrating a planned zero percent compliance on that one.

[dpedin]

Some pretty big jumps in hospitalisations and ICU today it seems. 928 in hospital up from 556 on the 18th and 74 from 43 yesterday, respectively.

There's only a couple of hundred ICU beds in Scotland, isn't there? Doesn't bode well for the winter, when we're still a couple of months away from peak respiratory disease season.

This was from June:

Boards now have the capability to provide 585 ICU beds, increased from 173, and continue to plan towards being able to quadruple capacity to more than 700 beds if required.

I also saw that we have 13,000 normal beds so that is also obviously a concern.

Bed capacity is an interesting issue.

Remember that additional ICU bed capacity will be located in theatres, recovery areas, etc as these areas are closest to ICU areas in terms of serial environment, access to supplies, etc thus dramatically reducing capacity for any elective surgical work. The costs of expanding ICU beds because of covid19 for a lengthy period over winter is huge in terms of delayed ops and increased waiting times and numbers. This will have a huge impact and potential patient harm as folk wait longer than they should for hip and knee joint replacements, hernia repairs, heart ops, etc. Also smaller ICUs may not be able to be split into covid and non-covid areas so just one positive patient in these ICUs means you can't have other covid negative patients in them. What does this mean - that hospital can't do elective surgery that might require access to ICU post op and some emergencies arriving at A&E will need to be diverted to bigger hospitals which access to non covid10 ICU beds. Could be quite a distance away!

Also remember that many hospital beds can't be used for covid19 - we need to separate out types of beds. For example paediatrics, maternity, mental health beds etc will still be required and can't be used for covid19 patients. Plus not all hospitals will have single bedded rooms so capacity will be further reduced due to distancing and isolation requirements. For example hospitals will require to isolate patients if admitted as an emergency until they have had a test for covid19 and in some hospitals that means they can only isolate in a 4 bedded ward which means 3 of the beds can't be used. Once they are found to have been positive or negative they can then be transferred into appropriate ward area.

Also a number of beds will have to be ring fenced for emergency work, folk coming in through A&E and who require an emergency procedure or care. Without this capacity A&E units will quickly clog up and the whole system will grind to a halt. Emergency demand is actually highly predictable and hospitals will know how many beds they need for this.

So the reality of bed capacity can be quite different to the raw numbers that folk quote. Hence why the field hospitals were built.

Lastly I suspect that beds, ventilators or PPE will not be the limiting factor this time around, it will be staffing and in particular ICU nursing. These guys are highly skilled and take time to train. Usually you would have a nurse per bed 24/7 plus back up to cover breaks etc and in case of emergency. They are in short supply. They coped last time by reducing the 1-1 ratio and up skilling others to supplement the teams but it will be difficult to sustain again over a longer winter period. They are also knackered and I fear for them.

[Northern Lights]

Reason for spread was different. In Aberdeen it was traced back to spreading in pubs whereas in the West the issue was spread via folk going to each others homes and spreading it that way. Easier to lock down pubs and clubs in Aberdeen that trying to stop people visiting family and friends and having a cup of tea or a few drinks behind closed curtains in the West. I think most spread is now within families or households now? Having said that locking down earlier, even with less adherence, is always going to slow down the virus.

The restrictions to Aberdeen were not just the pubs where the initial outbreak happened. The local restricitons also included not meeting other housholds indoors and a travel limit of not more than 5 miles, care home visits were for only essential visits, so we were stopped from visiting family and friends as well. The SG were slow to act with the outbreak in Glasgow, didnt impose the same level of restrictions irrespective of where the initial outbreak occured, the two cities were treated very differently and we have seen what has happened with the explosion of cases across the whole of the central belt from not imposing the same level of lockdown. I suspect they were trying a different approach to see if they could bring it under control with less onerous restrictions and keep more of the economy open as there was a pretty big backlash in Aberdeen to the restrictions, it clearly didnt work and i am sure they are regretting not closing down tighter when they had the chance.

The test & trace system clearly isnt working the way that it is meant to and is at the moment overwhelmed by the sheer number of cases, the encouraging news as Biffer has just said is that it appears to be levelling off in terms of daily new cases and not increasing exponentially, will see how the NHS copes in due course, the deaths being reported will be magnified by the fact it is now into some care homes again and we know they have a high mortality rate.

I think we are probably agreeing, sort of? Central belt spread is predominately about pop density and levels of deprivation etc. plus the impact of students going back to Uni and spread unfortunately now reaching some care homes again.

However I would disagree about the Test and Protect system - in Scotland it is a combination of the serco run national lighthouse system and local Health Boards and PH teams provision. The national serco testing system isn't working and is failing badly. The testing provision and tracing system run by HBs seems to be working well with quicker turnaround times and far higher levels of tracing and self isolation than the privatised call centre system down south is achieving. There are still some problems with ongoing testing provision in care homes. There were however problems in getting the info on positive cases transferred from the national serco run testing & lighthouse labs system back into HBs quickly and accurately enough, this caused real problems with the tracking process. The benefit of local TaP system is that the HBs can analyse the positive case data, down to individual post code level, in great detail and tie in into other data they have to target actions required. They are doing this daily and are able to respond very, very quickly. However it does depend upon folk getting tested promptly and results being turned around quickly and the serco testing via drive in and home testing is still failing to hit the targets required. I suspect we will see Scotland expanding its own lab capacity and begin to reduce its use of the national system over time cause it aint working.

Well if you agree that had they imposed the same lockdown on Glasgow as they did in Aberdeen there is a good chance they would have contained the outbreak, then yes we are. The Glasgow outbreak and initial light lockdown was 1st September, students didnt go back until mid September.

If the test and protect system was working we wouldnt have the number of cases that we do have, it isnt working, the HB's dont have the capacity to fill the gap from the other providers you want to demonise and a bit of anecdotal but i was speaking with someone in the Grampian health board HR department and they are at absolute breaking point, they have had the recruitment of the tracers chucked on top their already full schedule with no extra resource provided, the other positions needing filled just arent happening and it getting progressively worse. Our system is not any better than Englands as much as you want to proclaim otherwise, they are both a shambles and this was the strategy for us to be able to open up more of the economy, so that is another failure to add to the growing list.

[Biffer]

Reason for spread was different. In Aberdeen it was traced back to spreading in pubs whereas in the West the issue was spread via folk going to each others homes and spreading it that way. Easier to lock down pubs and clubs in Aberdeen that trying to stop people visiting family and friends and having a cup of tea or a few drinks behind closed curtains in the West. I think most spread is now within families or households now? Having said that locking down earlier, even with less adherence, is always going to slow down the virus.

The restrictions to Aberdeen were not just the pubs where the initial outbreak happened. The local restricitons also included not meeting other housholds indoors and a travel limit of not more than 5 miles, care home visits were for only essential visits, so we were stopped from visiting family and friends as well. The SG were slow to act with the outbreak in Glasgow, didnt impose the same level of restrictions irrespective of where the initial outbreak occured, the two cities were treated very differently and we have seen what has happened with the explosion of cases across the whole of the central belt from not imposing the same level of lockdown. I suspect they were trying a different approach to see if they could bring it under control with less onerous restrictions and keep more of the economy open as there was a pretty big backlash in Aberdeen to the restrictions, it clearly didnt work and i am sure they are regretting not closing down tighter when they had the chance.

The test & trace system clearly isnt working the way that it is meant to and is at the moment overwhelmed by the sheer number of cases, the encouraging news as Biffer has just said is that it appears to be levelling off in terms of daily new cases and not increasing exponentially, will see how the NHS copes in due course, the deaths being reported will be magnified by the fact it is now into some care homes again and we know they have a high mortality rate.

I think we are probably agreeing, sort of? Central belt spread is predominately about pop density and levels of deprivation etc. plus the impact of students going back to Uni and spread unfortunately now reaching some care homes again.

However I would disagree about the Test and Protect system - in Scotland it is a combination of the serco run national lighthouse system and local Health Boards and PH teams provision. The national serco testing system isn't working and is failing badly. The testing provision and tracing system run by HBs seems to be working well with quicker turnaround times and far higher levels of tracing and self isolation than the privatised call centre system down south is achieving. There are still some problems with ongoing testing provision in care homes. There were however problems in getting the info on positive cases transferred from the national serco run testing & lighthouse labs system back into HBs quickly and accurately enough, this caused real problems with the tracking process. The benefit of local TaP system is that the HBs can analyse the positive case data, down to individual post code level, in great detail and tie in into other data they have to target actions required. They are doing this daily and are able to respond very, very quickly. However it does depend upon folk getting tested promptly and results being turned around quickly and the serco testing via drive in and home testing is still failing to hit the targets required. I suspect we will see Scotland expanding its own lab capacity and begin to reduce its use of the national system over time cause it aint working.

For clarity, can I just check something? My understanding was that in England tracing was being done by a mix of SerCo and the local public health teams. In Scotland I thought it was solely the local public health teams.

Also, I didn't think Serco were involved in the lighthouse labs - as far as I understood it, it was Department of Health, Medicines Discovery Catapult, UK Biocentre, the University of Glasgow, GSK, AstraZeneca, the University of Cambridge, and PerkinElmer, different ones being involved in each of the labs.

Finally, a useful resource that you might not have seen - the public health Scotland dashboard has expanded recently - you can now look at the numbers of cases right down to neighbourhoods of a few thousand across Scotland. breakdowns and trends available at NHS board and council level, and if you want you can figure it out at neighbourhood level. For instance you can see that although Lothian health board numbers have been pretty level across the last few weeks, you can see that it's increasing in West Lothian, decreasing in Edinburgh and a fair bit lower in Midlothian and East Lothian.

https://public.tableau.com/profile/phs. ... 0/Overview

[Biffer]

Oh, and just to note that I'm always cheered up by the hotness of our acting deputy Chief Medical Officer when she's on the lunchtime briefing.

[dpedin]

The restrictions to Aberdeen were not just the pubs where the initial outbreak happened. The local restricitons also included not meeting other housholds indoors and a travel limit of not more than 5 miles, care home visits were for only essential visits, so we were stopped from visiting family and friends as well. The SG were slow to act with the outbreak in Glasgow, didnt impose the same level of restrictions irrespective of where the initial outbreak occured, the two cities were treated very differently and we have seen what has happened with the explosion of cases across the whole of the central belt from not imposing the same level of lockdown. I suspect they were trying a different approach to see if they could bring it under control with less onerous restrictions and keep more of the economy open as there was a pretty big backlash in Aberdeen to the restrictions, it clearly didnt work and i am sure they are regretting not closing down tighter when they had the chance.

The test & trace system clearly isnt working the way that it is meant to and is at the moment overwhelmed by the sheer number of cases, the encouraging news as Biffer has just said is that it appears to be levelling off in terms of daily new cases and not increasing exponentially, will see how the NHS copes in due course, the deaths being reported will be magnified by the fact it is now into some care homes again and we know they have a high mortality rate.

I think we are probably agreeing, sort of? Central belt spread is predominately about pop density and levels of deprivation etc. plus the impact of students going back to Uni and spread unfortunately now reaching some care homes again.

However I would disagree about the Test and Protect system - in Scotland it is a combination of the serco run national lighthouse system and local Health Boards and PH teams provision. The national serco testing system isn't working and is failing badly. The testing provision and tracing system run by HBs seems to be working well with quicker turnaround times and far higher levels of tracing and self isolation than the privatised call centre system down south is achieving. There are still some problems with ongoing testing provision in care homes. There were however problems in getting the info on positive cases transferred from the national serco run testing & lighthouse labs system back into HBs quickly and accurately enough, this caused real problems with the tracking process. The benefit of local TaP system is that the HBs can analyse the positive case data, down to individual post code level, in great detail and tie in into other data they have to target actions required. They are doing this daily and are able to respond very, very quickly. However it does depend upon folk getting tested promptly and results being turned around quickly and the serco testing via drive in and home testing is still failing to hit the targets required. I suspect we will see Scotland expanding its own lab capacity and begin to reduce its use of the national system over time cause it aint working.

Well if you agree that had they imposed the same lockdown on Glasgow as they did in Aberdeen there is a good chance they would have contained the outbreak, then yes we are. The Glasgow outbreak and initial light lockdown was 1st September, students didnt go back until mid September.

If the test and protect system was working we wouldnt have the number of cases that we do have, it isnt working, the HB's dont have the capacity to fill the gap from the other providers you want to demonise and a bit of anecdotal but i was speaking with someone in the Grampian health board HR department and they are at absolute breaking point, they have had the recruitment of the tracers chucked on top their already full schedule with no extra resource provided, the other positions needing filled just arent happening and it getting progressively worse. Our system is not any better than Englands as much as you want to proclaim otherwise, they are both a shambles and this was the strategy for us to be able to open up more of the economy, so that is another failure to add to the growing list.

I thought I had explained why our system was having problems and that was mostly around the failure of the UK wide Serco run testing and labs system failing badly! This is a fact - it is not delivering testing capacity where it is required nor are the tests results being turned around within the promised 24 hour turnaround time. We in Scotland are dependant upon that system as much as our own PH run labs system and if the national delivered testing isn't being done, reports late or doesn't provide the detailed info to our local contact tracers promptly then we have a problem. We need to expand out own testing and lab capacity here in Scotland cause the Serco system is failing, badly, and will never meet the promised delivery targets! Our tracing system here in Scotland is performing much better than the Serco and sub contractor based centralised system down south - hence why Hancock et al are ploughing money into the regions down there to supplement the Serco system and why the Blonde Bumblecunt acknowledged the Serco testing system needed to improve quickly just the other day. I didnt think any of this was in dispute? Also didnt think anyone was disputing the fact that the Scottish based TaP system is performing far better than the system down south in terms of % of contacts traced, etc?

All the HBS are currently expanding the local tracing teams and yes it is difficult to manage the admin for HR depts but they are doing it. There are good folk in Grampian and they will get it done. Probably not helped that this emergency is happening at the same time as NHS Scotland was rolling out or bedding in new national HR and recruitment IT systems? Rarely does the NHS get additional cash coming along with additional demands, its a way of life in the NHS! However I also know that all HBs have had no shortage of candidates for these roles and have had huge numbers of excellent suitably skilled candidates from businesses that unfortunately have done badly during the pandemic - travel being one of them. In the first wave HBs used nurses and other staff to staff the tracing function who for a variety of reasons were shielding, self isolating, had child care/elderly care issues or whose services had been suspended. Laptops and mobiles were sent out and training was delivered on line within days and they were up and running within days. This time round these staff are mostly back at work so additional call tracing staff are required to supplement the existing PH teams. From my understanding, whilst it is difficult, plans are roughly on track.

I agree Track, Test and Trace is a key pillar of getting through the pandemic and out of any form of lock downs. However for Scotland we need to reduce dependency on the Serco UK system and build up our own testing and lab capacity and improve to improve the turnaround times and info flow to tracking teams. Waiting for the Serco managed lighthouse labs system to deliver the required turnaround targets is not a viable solution any time soon.