When will the coalition disolve?

After years of party politics, I'm seeing a different brand due to the coalition and understand the 'we're at war' so we'll stand together and get though it mentality. But seeing too many problems recently between the so-called partners. The tree hugging side is doing my head in as they can't sem to agree with the Cameronites. The right wing of the tory party is at odds with Cameron because the Mail and Express want immigration and Europe at the top of the agenda. As for the burk leading the Socialists I think he needs to go back to babysitting for his brother and leave the way open for a decent leader of his party. Someone who can maybe make some inroads into the lead Cameron has. Afterall the coalition should be struggling to keep the public onboard, but because the young fool isn't trusted by anyone Labour are well behind.

So what will be the straw that breaks the coalition apart, because it surley must at some stage.

It could only ever end in disaster...and it will. Means to very different ends for both parties. The Torys to rule and the Libs to have some kind of influence.
Bit the Torys under Cameron will head right and revert to their traditional values. The Liberals could have signed their own death warrant. I was a Liberal voter but wouldn't do do as things stand, they betrayed their rank and file as far as I'm concerned.
It will end this year and it won't be pretty. Shame Labour have the wrong Milliband otherwise a return to Govt could have been swift.

Nonsense Diggers. You're forgetting the give n'take part of this marriage of convenience would have been agreed to before 'the wets' agreed to side with the tories.

Right or wrong Milliband, don't forget they were tied to a party that royally stuffed the UK in allowing the banks to free rein it over our money.

I'm in no hurry to see the even wetter Labour back in government.

Lesser of two evils for me. I'd hope that Labour can rediscover their values, however I have no doubt the Torys will revert to theirs. Which is why they will never get my vote.
No way the Coaliton will survive 2012, I give it to maybe June. We can see how much nonsense I'm speaking then Gael.

It seems to me that the whole political landscape is redundant at the moment. Due to past mistakes home and abroad with the financial sectors, we now see non-politicians taking control in Greece and Italy. So democracy if you like, is having to take a back seat, whilst academics/experts try and resolve things. The Euro is still a bomb waiting to go off, and the Greeks look like not servicing their debts in March, which could see them fall out of the Eurozone.

At home anyone who wants to go into politics, usually for the right reasons, has to toe the party line, even though the local constituancy who elected them want something else. So the people who voted someone in are upset that they are not doing what they said they would. Theres a massive lack of interest in politics, as can be seen by very low polling/turn-out numbers, as people think that nothing will change, whoever is in power. Because our politicians go with the party instead of their concience, they will always be seen in a bad light, and as liars. Things are bad with manufacturing as we lost nearly everything to overseas plants and outsourcing. The Welfare state as been allowed to explode as it pays more to do nothing, and EU legislation meant paying welfare to many overseas based families in Eastern Europe, because they could. The effect this bad management has had, is to hurt the vulnerable who the welfare state was meant to assist. The same can be said of health, as the NHS isn't doing what it was set up to do, because its been allowed to change direction. our health service is being abused by anyone from the EU who can't afford to have treatment at home. The suppliers of medication have made billions out of the NHS as they make massive margins on everything. Education, health and safety legislation, policing, roads in fact the whole of society is on the slide. All the time people experience major problems, they will see extreme political parties coming to the fore, which will dilute any future elections. BNP, Greens, Right Wing, Anti Europe, Anti Capitalist, Ecco Warriers et al, oh for the days of the monster raving loony party.

Watching the schoolboy behaviour of our leaders every Wednesday in PMQ's only firms up peoples belief that our politicians don't have a clue. maybe the time is right for a joint political broadcast to explain to the people, the reality of what we're facing. Explain things and then promise to work together to resolve things speedily. At times of national crisis, like war, this is done, and I believe we're facing something worse at the moment, so the sooner they stop p1ssing about and sort it, the better.

I suspect Diggers could be correct and the coalition could disolve this year. This will mean another election where the only winner will be tory. The Lib Dems will lose out and Labour will be nowhere, meaning a more right wing jump by the new tory government, which could well see Nigel Ferage's party slip0 back inside the blue lines.

Diggers ... we could party-politics mud-sling all day but the simple truth is that it's been left to this coalition to get us out of this crisis that Labour put us into as a result of de-regulating the banks. I happen to think the coalition has worked pretty well so far.

Of course, there were going to disagreements about how exactly previously agreed policies would be applied and certainly never was that more true than when Cameron slapped the franco-german alliance in the face with yon veto but when the lib-dems threw their lot in with the tories, they must have known that the tories would bend so far and no further on issues european so if you think that a bust-up is imminent because of that then you need to go away "tae think again".

Besides which, it's a very long time since the libs tasted this kind of power and you know what they say about power?

The sooner the coalition dissolves and the tory hard-right get back into power the better. All this touchy feely moderation is making me sick.

Stop all benefits. Ban the NHS. Kill the cat owning hippies. And reduce taxes by selling all the council houses to evil corporations who can turn them into shanty towns and charge via a system of selling blood in return for a bed for the night or something.

gaelgowfer wrote:Diggers ... we could party-politics mud-sling all day but the simple truth is that it's been left to this coalition to get us out of this crisis that Labour put us into as a result of de-regulating the banks. I happen to think the coalition has worked pretty well so far.

Of course, there were going to disagreements about how exactly previously agreed policies would be applied and certainly never was that more true than when Cameron slapped the franco-german alliance in the face with yon veto but when the lib-dems threw their lot in with the tories, they must have known that the tories would bend so far and no further on issues european so if you think that a bust-up is imminent because of that then you need to go away "tae think again".

Besides which, it's a very long time since the libs tasted this kind of power and you know what they say about power?

I dont think the economic crisis...which was global remember...would have been in anyway avoided had the Torys been in power. In fact Id imagine it would have been a whole lot worse. They arent really doing anything different in solving the problems than Labour had proposed anyway. I simply believe they will care less about what areas the cuts are made in.
Its pretty obvious that nobody had predicted the Euro crisis or the extent of it when the coalition had formed so the Libs clearly wouldnt know to what degree they might have to bend their principles to "support" the Torys. Veto wasnt a word being thrown around early in 2011.
There is a whole lot more trouble to come in 2012 and something will break the coalition, its teetering anyway. Whether the right wing Torys or the principled Liberals break it, it will break. Its a marriage made in hell.

Diggers .. the global crisis may have started elsewhere but to suggest that we wouldn't have been in a better financial state had de-regulation not taken place is pure nonsense. As a direct result of de-regulation, a non-banker (Fred the Ned) and a glorified grocer (wothisname!) between them took this country down. Indeed, was it not RBS who suffered the biggest losses of all the banks?

I should say at this juncture that it's a very, very long time since I last voted for the tories lest you think I'm a diehard right-winger. Nevertheless, whenever another election is called I will want them to carry on just for the sake of fiscal continuity to see whether or not tightening the belts rather than spending our way of trouble (as Labour would do) will work.

However, for the reason you stated in that the tories dont have a good track record when it comes to looking after the less well off, it is for this reason I would prefer the Lib-Dems to follow through with the coalition. Any fit of pique on their part to throw in the towel before this parliamentarian round was completed would not only be childish but very damaging to our recovery.

As I stated before, they must have made some sort of deal with the tories as to what or how far they could go with their policies. After all, they could just as easily have decided to hook up with Labour and the only reason they didn't was, presumably, because they negotiated a better deal with the tories.

Nice post Doc.

gaelgowfer wrote:Diggers .. the global crisis may have started elsewhere but to suggest that we wouldn't have been in a better financial state had de-regulation not taken place is pure nonsense. As a direct result of de-regulation, a non-banker (Fred the Ned) and a glorified grocer (wothisname!) between them took this country down. Indeed, was it not RBS who suffered the biggest losses of all the banks?

I should say at this juncture that it's a very, very long time since I last voted for the tories lest you think I'm a diehard right-winger. Nevertheless, whenever another election is called I will want them to carry on just for the sake of fiscal continuity to see whether or not tightening the belts rather than spending our way of trouble (as Labour would do) will work.

However, for the reason you stated in that the tories dont have a good track record when it comes to looking after the less well off, it is for this reason I would prefer the Lib-Dems to follow through with the coalition. Any fit of pique on their part to throw in the towel before this parliamentarian round was completed would not only be childish but very damaging to our recovery.

As I stated before, they must have made some sort of deal with the tories as to what or how far they could go with their policies. After all, they could just as easily have decided to hook up with Labour and the only reason they didn't was, presumably, because they negotiated a better deal with the tories.

Gael, Labour didnt start the deregulation of the financial markets, they merely chose to carry on where the Torys left off. I have no doubt in my mind that the Conservatives would have chosen to carry on with exactly the same policies.
You seem to think that deals dont change, that goalposts are not moved. Public sector workers may well choose to differ with you.
The Torys will take advantage of the political landscape as soon as they think they can return a full majority, which may well be this summer.
The reason that the Libs begrudguingly sided with the Torys is mainly down from what I gather to aggressive negotiation from the likes of Brown and Balls in particular.Perhaps they thought that teh Libs would never really be dumb enough to side with the Torys, sadly they were wrong.

Doc wrote:It seems to me that the whole political landscape is redundant at the moment. Due to past mistakes home and abroad with the financial sectors, we now see non-politicians taking control in Greece and Italy. So democracy if you like, is having to take a back seat, whilst academics/experts try and resolve things. The Euro is still a bomb waiting to go off, and the Greeks look like not servicing their debts in March, which could see them fall out of the Eurozone.

At home anyone who wants to go into politics, usually for the right reasons, has to toe the party line, even though the local constituancy who elected them want something else. So the people who voted someone in are upset that they are not doing what they said they would. Theres a massive lack of interest in politics, as can be seen by very low polling/turn-out numbers, as people think that nothing will change, whoever is in power. Because our politicians go with the party instead of their concience, they will always be seen in a bad light, and as liars. Things are bad with manufacturing as we lost nearly everything to overseas plants and outsourcing. The Welfare state as been allowed to explode as it pays more to do nothing, and EU legislation meant paying welfare to many overseas based families in Eastern Europe, because they could. The effect this bad management has had, is to hurt the vulnerable who the welfare state was meant to assist. The same can be said of health, as the NHS isn't doing what it was set up to do, because its been allowed to change direction. our health service is being abused by anyone from the EU who can't afford to have treatment at home. The suppliers of medication have made billions out of the NHS as they make massive margins on everything. Education, health and safety legislation, policing, roads in fact the whole of society is on the slide. All the time people experience major problems, they will see extreme political parties coming to the fore, which will dilute any future elections. BNP, Greens, Right Wing, Anti Europe, Anti Capitalist, Ecco Warriers et al, oh for the days of the monster raving loony party.

Watching the schoolboy behaviour of our leaders every Wednesday in PMQ's only firms up peoples belief that our politicians don't have a clue. maybe the time is right for a joint political broadcast to explain to the people, the reality of what we're facing. Explain things and then promise to work together to resolve things speedily. At times of national crisis, like war, this is done, and I believe we're facing something worse at the moment, so the sooner they stop p1ssing about and sort it, the better.

I suspect Diggers could be correct and the coalition could disolve this year. This will mean another election where the only winner will be tory. The Lib Dems will lose out and Labour will be nowhere, meaning a more right wing jump by the new tory government, which could well see Nigel Ferage's party slip0 back inside the blue lines.

Doc I do agree with a lot of what you say. But democracy isnt just about the political parties and voting, its about the right to protest and there has certainly been plenty of political activity on that front in 2011.
I still think many people are politically engaged, they just dont necessarilly feel they are being listened to anymore. Actions like Blair going into Iraq and choosing to ignore the 100'000's of people marching in protest. Cameron being disgustingly dismissive of the protests from the public sector after slashing their pensions.
These are the kind of things that make people either disengaged or angry.

LondonJonnyO wrote:The sooner the coalition dissolves and the tory hard-right get back into power the better. All this touchy feely moderation is making me sick.

Stop all benefits. Ban the NHS. Kill the cat owning hippies. And reduce taxes by selling all the council houses to evil corporations who can turn them into shanty towns and charge via a system of selling blood in return for a bed for the night or something.

LondonJonnyO for Prime Minister!

Blue, I doubt LJ's mindset is a million miles away from the guy who is the current PM.

But does that guy sport any lime green trousers Digs?...

Actually Digs I think Cameron is far too leftish and a bit of a nancy.

I'd prefer someone a lot more right focused and not worried about telling the unions... No pensions. Sod off and go on strike if you like. We'll hire in private contractors to do it and then you'll be screwed. And while you're on strike/out of work through being idiots we're not paying your mortgage/rent so your house will be repossessed thus increasing availability for those who actually work for a living.

Then I'd send in the police in riot gear to beat the crap out of them if they protest.

Finally. I'd build a Berlin wall type extension to Hadrians wall and invade france.

Gets my vote LJ...

He's just playing at being a leftie LJ. If/when he gets a full mandate you will have your wishes.....well some of them. Definitely invading France will be up there though. Though he is such a toff he's probably mainly French or German.

diggers wrote:

gaelgowfer wrote:Diggers .. the global crisis may have started elsewhere but to suggest that we wouldn't have been in a better financial state had de-regulation not taken place is pure nonsense. As a direct result of de-regulation, a non-banker (Fred the Ned) and a glorified grocer (wothisname!) between them took this country down. Indeed, was it not RBS who suffered the biggest losses of all the banks?

I should say at this juncture that it's a very, very long time since I last voted for the tories lest you think I'm a diehard right-winger. Nevertheless, whenever another election is called I will want them to carry on just for the sake of fiscal continuity to see whether or not tightening the belts rather than spending our way of trouble (as Labour would do) will work.

However, for the reason you stated in that the tories dont have a good track record when it comes to looking after the less well off, it is for this reason I would prefer the Lib-Dems to follow through with the coalition. Any fit of pique on their part to throw in the towel before this parliamentarian round was completed would not only be childish but very damaging to our recovery.

As I stated before, they must have made some sort of deal with the tories as to what or how far they could go with their policies. After all, they could just as easily have decided to hook up with Labour and the only reason they didn't was, presumably, because they negotiated a better deal with the tories.

Gael, Labour didnt start the deregulation of the financial markets, they merely chose to carry on where the Torys left off. I have no doubt in my mind that the Conservatives would have chosen to carry on with exactly the same policies.
You seem to think that deals dont change, that goalposts are not moved. Public sector workers may well choose to differ with you.
The Torys will take advantage of the political landscape as soon as they think they can return a full majority, which may well be this summer.
The reason that the Libs begrudguingly sided with the Torys is mainly down from what I gather to aggressive negotiation from the likes of Brown and Balls in particular.Perhaps they thought that teh Libs would never really be dumb enough to side with the Torys, sadly they were wrong.

Bloody Nora ... diggers, I did respond to your post earlier on but it doesn't seem to be here. Either we've had a navyblueshorts infestation or I pushed the wrong bleedin' button!

Now, what the bleedin' 'eck did I say?

Ok ... fair enough - it was the tories who started the de-reg thing - concede that point. I was thinking more about Labour's stuff up when they introduced the FSA which turned out to be a toothless entity when it comprehensively failed to properly check how the banks were being run in the run-up to the financial meltdown.

Re the public sector, however dastardly the government has behaved over this, I don't think there'll be too much sympathy for pub sec from the private sector given the lousy pension prospects its likely to yield. At the end of the day, the country's skint and people are living longer so who's going to fund public sector demands? Oh, I remember now ... the private sector!

gaelgowfer wrote:Bloody Nora ... diggers, I did respond to your post earlier on but it doesn't seem to be here. Either we've had a navyblueshorts infestation or I pushed the wrong bleedin' button!

Well as NBS moments aren't happening here I guess this one is down to you!

That's fine, I can live with that Davie. Better than the alternative.

Is the moderation getting heavy handed again on the darkside?

That, and the unwelcome PMs.

In relation to the deregulation of banks being one of the principal causes of the crisis in europe... I wonder what your thoughts on the capital requirement calculations, minimum capital requirements and the investment required in order to determine such numbers in complex modelling scenarios as a result of the basel II accord.

Whilst you are correct in saying that there has been localised deregulation of the bank there has been a more global tightening of the regulations which were implemented to try to ensure a more even footing for the various bank types and to handle the fact that many of them have different types of business.

I think what you mean to say is not that deregulation is at fault but that the risk management aspects and the aggregation of risk and collateral across banking divisions caused a massive underestimation of the risk taken on by the banks and thus a shortage when those loans which were over-rated began to default. As a result the LGD started to increase thus causing the banks to start losing money at a rapid rate and with no mechanism, or insufficient mechanism, to stop the drain of funds.

I would say that starts with the rating agencies and the over-rating of sovereign debt in many countries and also the consultancies who provided the initial finger in the air correlations used to aggregate the risk figures.

Further...

Is now a good time to go advertise for more golfing people as a result of the excessive modding I wonder?

LJ - I think we are only really missing Kwini and PrinceDrac - unless I've missed someone

ah. Well... not to worry. In that case it sounds like time for an IP attack.

Let me just go get my other machine... the one I use for naughty hacking stuff.

LondonJonnyO wrote:In relation to the deregulation of banks being one of the principal causes of the crisis in europe... I wonder what your thoughts on the capital requirement calculations, minimum capital requirements and the investment required in order to determine such numbers in complex modelling scenarios as a result of the basel II accord.

Whilst you are correct in saying that there has been localised deregulation of the bank there has been a more global tightening of the regulations which were implemented to try to ensure a more even footing for the various bank types and to handle the fact that many of them have different types of business.

I think what you mean to say is not that deregulation is at fault but that the risk management aspects and the aggregation of risk and collateral across banking divisions caused a massive underestimation of the risk taken on by the banks and thus a shortage when those loans which were over-rated began to default. As a result the LGD started to increase thus causing the banks to start losing money at a rapid rate and with no mechanism, or insufficient mechanism, to stop the drain of funds.

I would say that starts with the rating agencies and the over-rating of sovereign debt in many countries and also the consultancies who provided the initial finger in the air correlations used to aggregate the risk figures.

Fess up now LJ ... which book did you get that from then?

Definitely need new source of members. Golf Observer started off with a decent number from the old BBC message board (although probably not as many as 50) but eventually dwindled down to a handful or so.

[quote="gaelgowfer"][quote="diggers"]

gaelgowfer wrote:

Ok ... fair enough - it was the tories who started the de-reg thing - concede that point. I was thinking more about Labour's stuff up when they introduced the FSA which turned out to be a toothless entity when it comprehensively failed to properly check how the banks were being run in the run-up to the financial meltdown.

Re the public sector, however dastardly the government has behaved over this, I don't think there'll be too much sympathy for pub sec from the private sector given the lousy pension prospects its likely to yield. At the end of the day, the country's skint and people are living longer so who's going to fund public sector demands? Oh, I remember now ... the private sector!

What an odd appraisal - but you're right on one thing there is certainly no sympathy from either side.

I'll tell you what, let's make an agreement. You give me so much money over a period of years and I'll agree to give it back to you with an amount of interest that we can agree on. Ten years later, I end up telling you that the previous agreement was meaningless, please renegotiate a new one.

There are many different public service pension fund providers (many of which are not government controlled and very well managed) and Unions involved and by public sector you're talking about nearly six million workers ranging from care assistants to highly paid civil servants. The Unions do themselves no favours by fighting amongst themselves and often being too demanding and to a certain extent that is the case here. Yes the country is in a mess, generally brought about by financial greed and incompetence both globally and nationally and conveniently, the Government target those that they can easily pick off, and absurdly somehow blame, in an effort to turn the economic Titanic around. If it wasn't so sad it would be laughable. By the way, the vast majority of work in this area is awarded by the local authority(s) to the private sector in terms of contracts for building, roads, catering etc You know, that area of public sector that has been forced to make drastic cuts. The upshot being that it's not just the private sector that allegedly funds the demands (joke) it's both...

I too miss Kwini and the Prince.

Gael that's all me.

Am I the first person Gael has ever admitted she was wrong....sort of...to. Give Diggers a great big hug Gael

Incidentally.

There has been correlation of risk not just across banking divisions but also in terms of risk type.

So you see Credit, Market, Operational and other risk elements aggregated at the standardised 0.7 correlation touted by the FED but not really thought through in my opinion. That is as much to blame as anything else... that and the fact that the FED decreed that Basel II wasn't relevant for the majority of their banks thus causing them to be reporting on antiquated modelling assumptions.

The insurance industry is about to get it's first real taste of the nightmare that these things cause in terms of Solvency II. And that is generating huge revenue for the software/consultancy firms at the moment. Should be interesting to see how they handle the lessons learned from the internal and standardised modelling techniques which were applicable under Basel II and are somewhat mirrored in Sol II without having the same levels of choice as Basel.

The first fines for inadequate planning and setting aside arbitrary amounts as capital have already occurred. And a lot of the companies are panicing as a result of the first round of FSA audits of their preparations.

You know when the whole worlds screwed, and thats when the US change their defence strategy. Yesterday Obama announced a $750b defence cut, which will throw thousands of army and marines out jobs. This is massive and means that NATO and Europe is being left, with the emphasis now going to the Asia/Pacific sphere. The yanks have wasted over a trillion dollars in 2 gulf wars and Afghanistan, and they realise that this cash could have been better utilised sorting out their internal employment/industry problems. Those pointless wars have had zero effect in the region (Besides Sadam vanishing) Iraq is on the verge of internal war again with explosions going off every day and now the yanks have left the Afghan's its kicking off there as well.

The yanks, Japanese, Russians and Chinese are all about to start a trade war against the EU, because of the latest airline tarrifs, which they are going to refuse to pay. The yanks tried to sort it in the European courts, but got nowhere, so will just refuse to pay. The EU will levy massive fines against these airlines, which won't get paid, so will retaliate by introducing taxes against EU airline operators and all this will lead to carnage. I think the yanks have had enough of the EU and EU defence policy including a toothless NATO. They are sick of picking up the bill for stuff the EU should be sorting themselves going right back to the Balcon conflicts and NATO and the UN are just a waste of space when stiff sanctions and compliance by all member nations is requested. It wouldn't surprise me if the yanks expelled the UN from New York, as they pick up the bulk of the costs for this lame duck organisation, and never get any backing for anything.

diggers wrote:Am I the first person Gael has ever admitted she was wrong....sort of...to. Give Diggers a great big hug Gael

Huh ... damn cheek. Y'know what ya can do with this ...

Gael

I was at a shoot last year when Fred the Ned was a guest.
I was wondering who would get him first, the guns, the dogs, the beaters or the pheasants.
Amazingly he survived.

The lib/dems are now finished in Scotland which is a shame.
We will now have a two party state SNP or Labour. Heaven help us.

I see Forrest Gump and The Hon. Davie have found something to agree on.

Interesting.

Two recent polls have the Independance vote in Scotland as 29% and 40%.

If England and Wales were to vote seperately for a Scottish Independance they would vote 33% [29] and 43% [40] in favour.

The neighbours don't appear to likes us''

Doon, there are a few things I think are probably unpopular. Firsly Salmond isn't much liked. Secondly I think a lot of people in England feel that the Scots currently get the best of both worlds, I dont know anyone who likes the fact that Scottish MPS can have a say in events at Westmisnster whilst having sole control over certain elements of their own legislation.
I would say that most people would prefer the Union to stay but equally a lot of people (me included) do not agree with the devolution of power as it currently stands.

Devolution in Scotland should take the following form.

Let them have their own country. Remove the UK military and all hardware from Scotland as it was centrally paid for and they don't want any central government anymore.

Build a version of the Berlin Wall on top of Hadrians wall and populate the towers with the descendants of people who had a sheep nicked armed with grenade launchers.

Then invade and use biological and chemical weapons with impunity against the population of Govan.

Nick the country back and enslave any objectors making them work as mussel collectors in unknown tidal conditions.

I'm in agreement with Diggers on this. I don't see why the Scots should be able to do what they do up there with regard to education, universities, health etc as they're all part of the union, so it should be the same throughout the whole UK for everyone.

I very boringley sat through a debate on the BBC's Westminster channel a couple of months ago. (Couldn't sleep, and find watching this better than counting sheep) it was a select committee hearing on the union, with top civil servants giving evidence, as well as top Statisticians and NGA's. The evidence suggested that if a vote were get the Scots out of the union, they would suffer massive financial hardship. The UK government gives more per head to Scotland than anywhere else, and withdrawing that money would see a massive implosion of all Scottish institutions. Scottish taxes would need to rise by a huge ammount and would still not cover the loss of westminster subsidy. The red herring about north sea oil, is just that, and although revenues would be raised, westminster revenues would also rise significantly due to the way seperation would need to be done. Border agency, HMRC, defence would also be a huge concern for the Scots, but would actually be a massive saving for westminster. UK based banks would leave Scotland and this was stated as being fact by 2 leading economists, unless seperate banking legislation could be reached, which is unlikeley. The majore supermarkets are already jarred off with Scotland as they're being penalised by the new rates for properties over a certain sq footage, which has already meant some large retailers are closing operations north of the border. The alcohol legislation is also hurting retailers up there so don't need much of an excuse to shut doors up there.

Salmond is being disingenious as he wants his cake and eat it, but his bluff is being called. he wants the best of both worlds, which means some of this and some of that, but we'll keep the queen, and sterling ...... Sorry Alex shit or get off the pot mate. Salmond also knows that he won't get a majority for seperation, so if he loses, he knows his party really needs to disband and reform as something else. Scottish nationilist party, means the platform what they fight on and losing the argument makes the party a non party, because it would be another 200 years before the thing can be raised again.

Doc I agree with most of what you say, this is all smoke and mirrors. The people of Scotland will never vote in favour of a seperate Scottish state.

Trouble is we are being ruled by a Government that has only one MP in Scotland, and only just in as well.

Re Military withdrawl, IF it did happen there could be an interesting debate on where in England and Wales the nuclear subs would be based.
Essex probably

Oh No Peacocks has gone bust, where will I buy my golf sweaters now!

PS
Interesting question on Pointless tonight.

Can anyone [who did not see it] name the six UK political party leaders in office from 1990 who were born in Scotland.

Doon the Water wrote:Re Military withdrawl, IF it did happen there could be an interesting debate on where in England and Wales the nuclear subs would be based.
Essex probably

More likely Plymouth or some other location with an established base for submarine activity.

Faslane is favourite because of its easy access to the North Atlantic and North Sea routes. Also it is relatively out of the way and obscure. Plymouth is a just a little bit too public for the more covert ops.

There is always the place that a lot of the subs were built though

They should get rid if the subs as well, just stupid big boys toys. Sell them to the Saudis.

Good job that we hadn't sold them to the Saudis in 1982 then Digs, when they kept the Argentinian Navy in the ports. No doubt we would have lost more than 255 men in the Falklands conflict if that Navy had been able to join in

Glad they came in useful 30 years ago, not been much use since. How much money, how many life's could have been improved or saved without having to pay for them.

The six Scots born Party Leaders since 1990 were

John Smith
IDS
Ming
Kennedy
Blair
Broon.