NPR

dpedin wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 6:58 pm 'Boris was quite explicit a few months ago that we would remain in the scheme' is not exactly a cast iron guarantee! Bit like no border in the Irish Sea or £350m for the NHS?

Biffer wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 5:28 am

Knuckledragger wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:05 pm Any thoughts on why the SNP have not simply followed the same approach as Westminster and why they can’t implement the change immediately?

I think, from a quick browse of ONS stats, that it affects roughly the same proportion of house sales. Demonstrates the difference in prices across England and Scotland. So the stimulus applies to the same amount of the the market, so should have roughly the same effect.

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 7:58 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 5:28 am

Knuckledragger wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:05 pm Any thoughts on why the SNP have not simply followed the same approach as Westminster and why they can’t implement the change immediately?

I think, from a quick browse of ONS stats, that it affects roughly the same proportion of house sales. Demonstrates the difference in prices across England and Scotland. So the stimulus applies to the same amount of the the market, so should have roughly the same effect.

One thing that's clearly not been taken into account is the geographical distribution of the threshold. There should be a different limit for Edinburgh versus the rest of the country, in my view, similar to the partitions that were done under the Osbourne right to buy in 2012.

Biffer wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 8:04 am

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 7:58 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 5:28 am

I think, from a quick browse of ONS stats, that it affects roughly the same proportion of house sales. Demonstrates the difference in prices across England and Scotland. So the stimulus applies to the same amount of the the market, so should have roughly the same effect.

One thing that's clearly not been taken into account is the geographical distribution of the threshold. There should be a different limit for Edinburgh versus the rest of the country, in my view, similar to the partitions that were done under the Osbourne right to buy in 2012.

Yeah, it’s difficult. You want to stimulate the housing market but you don’t want more people buying second homes in the highlands.

Slick wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 9:35 pm

dpedin wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 6:58 pm 'Boris was quite explicit a few months ago that we would remain in the scheme' is not exactly a cast iron guarantee! Bit like no border in the Irish Sea or £350m for the NHS?

OK, so are we in or out? It’s not a trick question, I don’t know.

dpedin wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 9:00 am

Slick wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 9:35 pm

dpedin wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 6:58 pm 'Boris was quite explicit a few months ago that we would remain in the scheme' is not exactly a cast iron guarantee! Bit like no border in the Irish Sea or £350m for the NHS?

OK, so are we in or out? It’s not a trick question, I don’t know.

Ive no idea either!

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 2:52 pm Got a jury citation through for August. Don't much fancy sitting in a room, whatever size it is, with 30 or 40 other people, nobody wearing any face coverings, for a week. Doubt there's much I can do about it though.

Blackmac wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 7:01 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 2:52 pm Got a jury citation through for August. Don't much fancy sitting in a room, whatever size it is, with 30 or 40 other people, nobody wearing any face coverings, for a week. Doubt there's much I can do about it though.

Just buy a Blue Lives Matter t-shirt and wear it for the first day. I guarantee you will be home quick smart.

Jock42 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 7:23 am on a purely selfish note, I'm glad I'm not night-shift tonight

Time for a few other crews to get hammered.

Slick wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 7:45 am

Jock42 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 7:23 am on a purely selfish note, I'm glad I'm not night-shift tonight

Time for a few other crews to get hammered.

Is it pub opening today?

Jock42 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 8:50 am

Slick wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 7:45 am

Jock42 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 7:23 am on a purely selfish note, I'm glad I'm not night-shift tonight

Time for a few other crews to get hammered.

Is it pub opening today?

Yup. The beer gardens opening was messy enough. That might take the edge off though tbf

Slick wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 8:51 am

Jock42 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 8:50 am

Slick wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 7:45 am

Is it pub opening today?

Yup. The beer gardens opening was messy enough. That might take the edge off though tbf

It's amazing (well, it's not really) how little you hear about Scotland on the news down here (at my mums for a couple of weeks in England). It's really nice to be honest...

Dogbert wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 10:52 am Should the SNP daily party political broadcasts hoseted daily on the BBC not be stopped , The Westminster Government has stopped having daily updates

Biffer wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 11:33 am

Dogbert wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 10:52 am Should the SNP daily party political broadcasts hoseted daily on the BBC not be stopped , The Westminster Government has stopped having daily updates

Westminster has chosen to stop. Holyrood has chosen to continue. I think better communication has been part of the response in Scotland.

Smutley wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:12 pm Depends whether you see the House of Lords as an abomination or not.

IMO you're right in that most people in Scotland see Westminster as remote, but for most of them it's about values more than geography. Devolution has shown that a Scottish Government can run things competently whilst being more closely aligned with what Scots want.

What you're seeing lately is more of a contrast in the competence stakes which is pushing a lot of waverers into the independence camp.

Looks like the UK Govt are going to do a bit of grandstanding on regional devolution. I'm not sure yet whether this is some sort of sop to "level-up" the north, to dilute Scottish separatist sentiment, or both. However, expect lots of stories about how Yorkshire has more people than Scotland, or talk about the UK "internal market".

Smutley wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:12 pm Depends whether you see the House of Lords as an abomination or not.

Smutley wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:12 pm IMO you're right in that most people in Scotland see Westminster as remote, but for most of them it's about values more than geography. Devolution has shown that a Scottish Government can run things competently whilst being more closely aligned with what Scots want.

Smutley wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:12 pm Looks like the UK Govt are going to do a bit of grandstanding on regional devolution. I'm not sure yet whether this is some sort of sop to "level-up" the north, to dilute Scottish separatist sentiment, or both. However, expect lots of stories about how Yorkshire has more people than Scotland, or talk about the UK "internal market".

Biffer wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:22 pm Until the government starts spending on infrastructure, civil service and military jobs more evenly across the country, there will be massive disparities in economic activity. The past decade or more has only increased the difference, and I have no confidence that the lumpen Uk state will ever redistribute its spending.

westport wrote: ↑Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:15 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:22 pm Until the government starts spending on infrastructure, civil service and military jobs more evenly across the country, there will be massive disparities in economic activity. The past decade or more has only increased the difference, and I have no confidence that the lumpen Uk state will ever redistribute its spending.

Was speaking to a friend from down south the other day, he is quite high up in Customs, he was saying there was a civil service broadcast at the begining of the week and it was said that there is a huge shift to hubs away from London across the UK, including Atlantic Quay Glasgow. This bit is already planned with the HMRC and few other departments, DWP etc, as they have signed contracts for moving into a new 10 storey building when it is finished.

KingBlairhorn wrote: ↑Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:45 am

westport wrote: ↑Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:15 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:22 pm Until the government starts spending on infrastructure, civil service and military jobs more evenly across the country, there will be massive disparities in economic activity. The past decade or more has only increased the difference, and I have no confidence that the lumpen Uk state will ever redistribute its spending.

Was speaking to a friend from down south the other day, he is quite high up in Customs, he was saying there was a civil service broadcast at the begining of the week and it was said that there is a huge shift to hubs away from London across the UK, including Atlantic Quay Glasgow. This bit is already planned with the HMRC and few other departments, DWP etc, as they have signed contracts for moving into a new 10 storey building when it is finished.

I suppose it depends not just what departments they move, but which jobs they move. London currently has just short of 90,000 civil servants, the most of any region by a long way. Scotland has around 44,000; this includes the Scottish government which is around 19,000 strong. The most interesting thing is that 4.4% of all civil servants in London are at the highest grade while this is just 0.6% outside London. Equally, 25.5% of jobs in London are at the next highest grade whereas that is only 8.2% elsewhere. There is a clear bias toward locating the 'best' jobs in London, and equally a clear bias to locating the 'worst' jobs outside of London. This also has to be re-balanced in any move if they really want to change the current system, rather than just shifting the lower-paid, lower-skilled jobs.

Source: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... 019-V2.pdf

Dogbert wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 10:52 am Should the SNP daily party political broadcasts hoseted daily on the BBC not be stopped , The Westminster Government has stopped having daily updates

dpedin wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:32 am Who tracks the trackers?

I see that there has been an outbreak of coronavirus in the Sitel run call centre in Motherwell which operates a call centre for NHS England track and trace system. 6 workers positive and testing of others underway. Track and Protect now engaged and doing follow ups to try and track down contacts and ensure they self isolate. Wonder if the Sitel risk assessment and social distancing at work was up to scratch? Just a little touch of irony involved here....

Didn't realise that English folk would be getting calls from Senga in Motherwell telling them to stay in the hoose, major design flaw in the English track and trace system?

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 12:32 pm

dpedin wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:32 am Who tracks the trackers?

I see that there has been an outbreak of coronavirus in the Sitel run call centre in Motherwell which operates a call centre for NHS England track and trace system. 6 workers positive and testing of others underway. Track and Protect now engaged and doing follow ups to try and track down contacts and ensure they self isolate. Wonder if the Sitel risk assessment and social distancing at work was up to scratch? Just a little touch of irony involved here....

Didn't realise that English folk would be getting calls from Senga in Motherwell telling them to stay in the hoose, major design flaw in the English track and trace system?

"Haw, stay the f*ck home, ya dobber"

Pretty effective I reckon

Stop me if you’ve heard this before. The government is founded upon, and obsessed with, an ideological project that prioritises sovereignty over economics. Its charismatic leader, with whom voters are universally on first-name terms, dominates politics.

Its strategy is to foster bitter cultural divides and then let its outriders accuse its opponents of disloyalty to the nation. It is taking increasing control of the civil service. It browbeats the media. On the coronavirus, it has talked a good game — but excess deaths are higher than they should be. And today its leader celebrates her 50th birthday.

If Boris Johnson would — rightly — object to such a caricature of his administration, Nicola Sturgeon would be downright furious. For the Scottish National Party (SNP), any comparison with the Tories is odious. The founding myth of Scottish nationalism is that it is warm-hearted and open-spirited where English nationalism is inward-looking and closed-minded: that we are nice and they are nasty.

In Scotland’s political culture, applying the label “Scottish” imbues almost anything with the kind of numinous glow that used to be the preserve of Marks & Spencer ads. This is not just a welfare policy, this is a Scottish welfare policy.

Yet in truth, all the mud the Nats sling at the Tories could — and should — be spattered on their own faces. This is a party, to give just one example, that responded to falling down the international educational league tables by withdrawing from the rankings.

On the coronavirus, Scotland’s performance has been broadly similar to England’s and by some measures worse. That Sturgeon talks about eliminating the disease, while Johnson focuses on suppressing it, is a product of population and geography, not any greater competence. And it is Rishi Sunak who is doing most to keep Scotland’s economy afloat, not least by paying the salaries of almost 900,000 Scots.

All of which will, unfortunately, have precious little impact on Scottish opinion. As polling shows, the pandemic is being taken as proof that Scotland really can do things differently and better. Nicola’s addresses to the nation — she is now, always, Nicola — have forged an emotional bond that overshadows inconvenient facts.

The thousands who have signed up to “clap for Nicola” on her birthday may be a bunch of bampots (in that wonderful Scottish phrase), but even Tory voters think she has done an impressive job.

It helps, of course, that she can draw a contrast with Johnson, who even before Covid-19 was as popular in Scotland as Marmite-flavoured shortbread. For Scots, she is Angela Merkel, he is Donald Trump.

The result, as polling for The Sunday Times has shown, is that support for independence has surged during the pandemic. Panelbase’s latest survey has “yes” at 54% and “no” on 46%. The SNP is predicted to win another crushing victory in the Holyrood elections next year, which it will use to call for another referendum. Never before have the Union’s foundations looked so weak.

The government in London is, understandably, taking this threat seriously. Luke Graham, an impressive former MP, has been installed in No 10 to advise on the Union. The aim is to use Brexit to send power and cash north of the border, while pushing back against the nationalists’ broader provocations.

But the stream of grievances and insinuations is never-ending. One fruitful area is Brexit, where England’s trade deals will apparently ram chlorinated chicken down Scottish throats. (Somehow, the 45% of Scots who voted for independence are a weighty bloc whose views must be respected, but the 38% who voted to leave are a tiny minority whose views can be ignored.)

Scotland’s finance secretary, Kate Forbes, wrote a piece for The Times last week complaining that Sunak’s latest £30bn rescue package would “generate just £21m in consequential payments to the Scottish government” — even though its centrepiece was a VAT cut that the SNP itself had called for. In fact, Sunak has bolstered Scotland’s coffers to the tune of £4.6bn in the pandemic.

Key to Sturgeon’s appeal is that she stands above the fray: she is not, she insists, anti-English; merely pro-Scottish. But there is more than a nudge and a wink to the nasty Nats. When a gang waving SNP flags assembled on the border to tell English “plague carriers” to “stay the f*** out”, it took her days to condemn them. Imagine how quickly she would have vaulted on to her high horse had it been the other way round.

It may be that the Scottish parliament’s investigation of the handling of complaints against the former first minister Alex Salmond, who was acquitted in March of charges of sexual assault, knocks some of the shine off, or at least deepens the fissures within, the SNP.

It is also true that the economic facts remain overwhelmingly on the unionist side — and that the SNP’s monomaniacal focus on independence leaves its wider track record, not least on education, open to all manner of criticism. Most Scots do still think you can be both Scottish and British.

But the broader problem for those who love the UK, in all its messy glory, is that Scotland is a five or six-party system, but increasingly a one-party state. Just as Sturgeon is the dominant figure in politics, especially with Ruth Davidson having quit the field, so the SNP is dominant institutionally.

Plausible young thrusters, plotting a political career, have only one obvious option. Ambitious civil servants, who technically report to Whitehall, follow the nationalist line. Businesses keep quiet if they know what’s good for them.

Time is also on Sturgeon’s side. The Union is most popular among the old, and least among the young. If there were a rerun of the referendum, Davidson is the only realistic candidate to lead it: beyond her, and the increasingly silver-haired figures of Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling, the unionist cupboard is alarmingly bare.

As she blows out her birthday candles, Scotland’s first minister is closer than ever to achieving her lifelong dream. If the Conservatives want to thwart her, they need to give the task the attention, and resources, it deserves.

clydecloggie wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:15 pm A lot in that piece that makes sense (and that's coming from a filthy Nat), but it lost me with saying power and money will get sent north because of Brexit, which must be absolute horseshit. Already devolution is being encroached on due to Brexit, and there is no hope in hell that the UK will be in any state to splash the cash in 2021.

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:30 pm

clydecloggie wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:15 pm A lot in that piece that makes sense (and that's coming from a filthy Nat), but it lost me with saying power and money will get sent north because of Brexit, which must be absolute horseshit. Already devolution is being encroached on due to Brexit, and there is no hope in hell that the UK will be in any state to splash the cash in 2021.

Swallowing Mike Russell's horseshit hook, line and sinker. The SNP pr machine is magnificent. Devolution is not being impacted at all, the complaint is pure fiction, powers that were in Brussels will now be in Westminster doesnt stop the grievance though.

Landslide for the SNP net year though, not an opposition leader in sight. Would like to see Ian Murray run for a Holyrood seat and become Scottish Leader, he si the only one i can think of now that Davidson has left the scene that would be half decent the rest are out of depth on a parish council.

Yr Alban wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:00 pm

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:30 pm

clydecloggie wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:15 pm A lot in that piece that makes sense (and that's coming from a filthy Nat), but it lost me with saying power and money will get sent north because of Brexit, which must be absolute horseshit. Already devolution is being encroached on due to Brexit, and there is no hope in hell that the UK will be in any state to splash the cash in 2021.

Swallowing Mike Russell's horseshit hook, line and sinker. The SNP pr machine is magnificent. Devolution is not being impacted at all, the complaint is pure fiction, powers that were in Brussels will now be in Westminster doesnt stop the grievance though.

Landslide for the SNP net year though, not an opposition leader in sight. Would like to see Ian Murray run for a Holyrood seat and become Scottish Leader, he si the only one i can think of now that Davidson has left the scene that would be half decent the rest are out of depth on a parish council.

Are you actually for real?

Here’s a summary of the changes by which you think devolution is ‘not being impacted at all’.

1. Powers being returned to the UK from Brussels that relate to devolved areas are not being returned to Holyrood. We knew this already, because the SNP correctly pointed out this contravened the Scotland Act and brought a legal case. This failed, as the judge noted, because what was proposed was illegal at the time, but in the interim legislation was passed at Westminster to legalise it.

2. Allegedly due to the need to protect the ‘UK internal market’ (an entirely mythical construct, as there have never been any barriers to free trade throughout the UK) a new quango is to be set up that will scrutinise new Holyrood legislation and will have the power to veto it if it thinks it will be detrimental to this imaginary market.

3. Again, due to this imaginary market, Westminster will now have the power to impose regulatory standards on the devolved governments, whether they agree to them or not. So if Westminster agrees to accept lower standards to make a trade deal with the US, for example, Holyrood will have no power to prevent the goods from going on sale in Scotland.

None of this is my opinion, or even Mike Russell’s. These are facts, and easily verifiable from a boatload of internet sites if you care to google ‘UK internal market bill’. Calling it ‘pure fiction’ is just blotting out reality.

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:18 pm

Yr Alban wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:00 pm

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:30 pm



Swallowing Mike Russell's horseshit hook, line and sinker. The SNP pr machine is magnificent. Devolution is not being impacted at all, the complaint is pure fiction, powers that were in Brussels will now be in Westminster doesnt stop the grievance though.

Landslide for the SNP net year though, not an opposition leader in sight. Would like to see Ian Murray run for a Holyrood seat and become Scottish Leader, he si the only one i can think of now that Davidson has left the scene that would be half decent the rest are out of depth on a parish council.

Are you actually for real?

Here’s a summary of the changes by which you think devolution is ‘not being impacted at all’.

1. Powers being returned to the UK from Brussels that relate to devolved areas are not being returned to Holyrood. We knew this already, because the SNP correctly pointed out this contravened the Scotland Act and brought a legal case. This failed, as the judge noted, because what was proposed was illegal at the time, but in the interim legislation was passed at Westminster to legalise it.

2. Allegedly due to the need to protect the ‘UK internal market’ (an entirely mythical construct, as there have never been any barriers to free trade throughout the UK) a new quango is to be set up that will scrutinise new Holyrood legislation and will have the power to veto it if it thinks it will be detrimental to this imaginary market.

3. Again, due to this imaginary market, Westminster will now have the power to impose regulatory standards on the devolved governments, whether they agree to them or not. So if Westminster agrees to accept lower standards to make a trade deal with the US, for example, Holyrood will have no power to prevent the goods from going on sale in Scotland.

None of this is my opinion, or even Mike Russell’s. These are facts, and easily verifiable from a boatload of internet sites if you care to google ‘UK internal market bill’. Calling it ‘pure fiction’ is just blotting out reality.

Number two is absolutely needed though, it's a bill designed to replace the EU competence and without it, you could have issues with trade as the starting point wouldn't be mutual recognition (or same standards in this case).
The reason there wasn't one before is that trading standards across borders were in their infancy in the 80s and hence, this legislation is to replace the litany of regulations that has been created globally since then by both the WTO and the across trading blocs (EU included). That's why there was never any legislation pre-dating the advent of EU single market or prior to joining EEC.

Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:36 pm

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:18 pm

Yr Alban wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:00 pm

Are you actually for real?

Here’s a summary of the changes by which you think devolution is ‘not being impacted at all’.

1. Powers being returned to the UK from Brussels that relate to devolved areas are not being returned to Holyrood. We knew this already, because the SNP correctly pointed out this contravened the Scotland Act and brought a legal case. This failed, as the judge noted, because what was proposed was illegal at the time, but in the interim legislation was passed at Westminster to legalise it.

2. Allegedly due to the need to protect the ‘UK internal market’ (an entirely mythical construct, as there have never been any barriers to free trade throughout the UK) a new quango is to be set up that will scrutinise new Holyrood legislation and will have the power to veto it if it thinks it will be detrimental to this imaginary market.

3. Again, due to this imaginary market, Westminster will now have the power to impose regulatory standards on the devolved governments, whether they agree to them or not. So if Westminster agrees to accept lower standards to make a trade deal with the US, for example, Holyrood will have no power to prevent the goods from going on sale in Scotland.

None of this is my opinion, or even Mike Russell’s. These are facts, and easily verifiable from a boatload of internet sites if you care to google ‘UK internal market bill’. Calling it ‘pure fiction’ is just blotting out reality.

Number two is absolutely needed though, it's a bill designed to replace the EU competence and without it, you could have issues with trade as the starting point wouldn't be mutual recognition (or same standards in this case).
The reason there wasn't one before is that trading standards across borders were in their infancy in the 80s and hence, this legislation is to replace the litany of regulations that has been created globally since then by both the WTO and the across trading blocs (EU included). That's why there was never any legislation pre-dating the advent of EU single market or prior to joining EEC.

It's the way it's being done though. It's going to be a panel appointed by the UK government with no input from Holyrood. So much for a partnership and all that other bullshit that we were fed during the indyref.

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:38 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:36 pm

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:18 pm


Number two is absolutely needed though, it's a bill designed to replace the EU competence and without it, you could have issues with trade as the starting point wouldn't be mutual recognition (or same standards in this case).
The reason there wasn't one before is that trading standards across borders were in their infancy in the 80s and hence, this legislation is to replace the litany of regulations that has been created globally since then by both the WTO and the across trading blocs (EU included). That's why there was never any legislation pre-dating the advent of EU single market or prior to joining EEC.

It's the way it's being done though. It's going to be a panel appointed by the UK government with no input from Holyrood. So much for a partnership and all that other bullshit that we were fed during the indyref.

Well, have the SNP noted any burning areas of desire where they would want a meaningfully different approach on trading standard, origination rules, labeling etc?