In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note.
Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon.
All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting.
Not that I have anything against the English. I spent most of my life in Sussex with my English father. However, I see both England and Scotland heading in two very different directions. I would also be happy with full devolution rather than completely splitting. The point is that in my opinion Westminster is not doing right by the Scottish people and that this needs to change. They have different norms and values to that of Scotland and is unlikely to change. We are two different countries, and should be treated as such both socially and politically.
Of course but how do you suppose to survive on your own ;_; Yes you want go in a different way but how are you going to afford to do that...
Not that I have anything against the English. I spent most of my life in Sussex with my English father. However, I see both England and Scotland heading in two very different directions. I would also be happy with full devolution rather than completely splitting. The point is that in my opinion Westminster is not doing right by the Scottish people and that this needs to change. They have different norms and values to that of Scotland and is unlikely to change. We are two different countries, and should be treated as such both socially and politically.
Of course but how do you suppose to survive on your own ;_; Yes you want go in a different way but how are you going to afford to do that...
I always find this question quite bamboozling. Independently we would be one of the richest nations on earth. We have vast amounts of north-sea oil. We occupy the greatest areas on earth for both wind farms and tidal power. The latter is something we are investing in heavily to the point where are already at the stage where we can power 20% of the countries homes by tidal power alone. Whether we remain part of the EU is yet to be seen but if not we would save a pretty penny each day not forking out millions for membership. Scotland is a very technologically advanced country and is investing heavily in research and engineering. Our overall budget is crippled by Westminster yet we still manage to give our young students free University level education. I could go on.
Bottom line is that we would have absolutely no problem what so ever supporting ourselves.
Not that I have anything against the English. I spent most of my life in Sussex with my English father. However, I see both England and Scotland heading in two very different directions. I would also be happy with full devolution rather than completely splitting. The point is that in my opinion Westminster is not doing right by the Scottish people and that this needs to change. They have different norms and values to that of Scotland and is unlikely to change. We are two different countries, and should be treated as such both socially and politically.
Of course but how do you suppose to survive on your own ;_; Yes you want go in a different way but how are you going to afford to do that...
I always find this question quite bamboozling. Independently we would be one of the richest nations on earth. We have vast amounts of north-sea oil. We occupy the greatest areas on earth for both wind farms and tidal power. The latter is something we are investing in heavily to the point where are already at the stage where we can power 20% of the countries homes by tidal power alone. Whether we remain part of the EU is yet to be seen but if not we would save a pretty penny each day not forking out millions for membership. Scotland is a very technologically advanced country and is investing heavily in research and engineering. Our overall budget is crippled by Westminster yet we still manage to give our young students free University level education. I could go on.
Bottom line is that we would have absolutely no problem what so ever supporting ourselves.
And yet Westminster spends more per person on welfare north of the border than it does south. The old West Lothian problem.
I had previously heard the BBC as overall leaning center-left. Are there any right-wing UK posters here that agree with original poster that the BBC really has no political leanings in a broad sense?
On the spectrum of other widely read publications in the UK, what's the major mouthpiece or mouthpieces of the right and the left?
Other than the largest party's conflicts with the European Court of Human Rights (as I see listed under Foreign Policy of the Conservative party), is there any other currently debated topics on Britain's economic and political/policy relationships with the European Union/European Commission?
I don't believe the BBC has any political leanings although that could just be that it generally agrees with me. I'm reasonably centrist by British standards.
The human rights one is just the latest issue in the ongoing question of sovereignty. In theory the EU treaties gave away sovereignty and established EU law as superior in some areas so the European court is the highest in the land. Constitutionally speaking though this is only because the treaties incorporated European law into British law, the principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty means that Westminster cannot pass a law that limits its own power. This creates a situation where there is a conflict between the two because previous governments did not really have the authority to commit to anything in EU treaties and the only way they did was on the understanding that none of it is actually binding unless we let it. This rears its head every time there is a conflict between the EU courts and Westminster, a good example of it is voting rights for prisoners. Prisoners are disenfranchised while they serve their time in the UK which is illegal under EU law and has been ruled illegal by the EU court of human rights but Westminster is currently ignoring that pending a debate on the issue where one of the options is to continue to ignore it. It's a situation where you can pick your law, pick your ruling and find either way but the one that wins is the one that actually enforces it and prison voting is a battle Westminster seems to want to fight on.
Not that I have anything against the English. I spent most of my life in Sussex with my English father. However, I see both England and Scotland heading in two very different directions. I would also be happy with full devolution rather than completely splitting. The point is that in my opinion Westminster is not doing right by the Scottish people and that this needs to change. They have different norms and values to that of Scotland and is unlikely to change. We are two different countries, and should be treated as such both socially and politically.
Of course but how do you suppose to survive on your own ;_; Yes you want go in a different way but how are you going to afford to do that...
I always find this question quite bamboozling. Independently we would be one of the richest nations on earth. We have vast amounts of north-sea oil. We occupy the greatest areas on earth for both wind farms and tidal power. The latter is something we are investing in heavily to the point where are already at the stage where we can power 20% of the countries homes by tidal power alone. Whether we remain part of the EU is yet to be seen but if not we would save a pretty penny each day not forking out millions for membership. Scotland is a very technologically advanced country and is investing heavily in research and engineering. Our overall budget is crippled by Westminster yet we still manage to give our young students free University level education. I could go on.
Bottom line is that we would have absolutely no problem what so ever supporting ourselves.
So much propaganda in your post. Quite sad if you are over 18 that you genuinely believe this.
Not that I have anything against the English. I spent most of my life in Sussex with my English father. However, I see both England and Scotland heading in two very different directions. I would also be happy with full devolution rather than completely splitting. The point is that in my opinion Westminster is not doing right by the Scottish people and that this needs to change. They have different norms and values to that of Scotland and is unlikely to change. We are two different countries, and should be treated as such both socially and politically.
Of course but how do you suppose to survive on your own ;_; Yes you want go in a different way but how are you going to afford to do that...
I always find this question quite bamboozling. Independently we would be one of the richest nations on earth. We have vast amounts of north-sea oil. We occupy the greatest areas on earth for both wind farms and tidal power. The latter is something we are investing in heavily to the point where are already at the stage where we can power 20% of the countries homes by tidal power alone. Whether we remain part of the EU is yet to be seen but if not we would save a pretty penny each day not forking out millions for membership. Scotland is a very technologically advanced country and is investing heavily in research and engineering. Our overall budget is crippled by Westminster yet we still manage to give our young students free University level education. I could go on.
Bottom line is that we would have absolutely no problem what so ever supporting ourselves.
So much propaganda in your post. Quite sad if you are over 18 that you genuinely believe this.
It's not propaganda it's fact. Go do some research.
Not that I have anything against the English. I spent most of my life in Sussex with my English father. However, I see both England and Scotland heading in two very different directions. I would also be happy with full devolution rather than completely splitting. The point is that in my opinion Westminster is not doing right by the Scottish people and that this needs to change. They have different norms and values to that of Scotland and is unlikely to change. We are two different countries, and should be treated as such both socially and politically.
Of course but how do you suppose to survive on your own ;_; Yes you want go in a different way but how are you going to afford to do that...
I always find this question quite bamboozling. Independently we would be one of the richest nations on earth. We have vast amounts of north-sea oil. We occupy the greatest areas on earth for both wind farms and tidal power. The latter is something we are investing in heavily to the point where are already at the stage where we can power 20% of the countries homes by tidal power alone. Whether we remain part of the EU is yet to be seen but if not we would save a pretty penny each day not forking out millions for membership. Scotland is a very technologically advanced country and is investing heavily in research and engineering. Our overall budget is crippled by Westminster yet we still manage to give our young students free University level education. I could go on.
Bottom line is that we would have absolutely no problem what so ever supporting ourselves.
So much propaganda in your post. Quite sad if you are over 18 that you genuinely believe this.
It's not propaganda it's fact. Go do some research.
Novel idea - why don't you provide the research that backs up your claims?
On July 11 2013 09:35 KwarK wrote: I don't believe the BBC has any political leanings although that could just be that it generally agrees with me. I'm reasonably centrist by British standards.
I'd say the BBC is somewhat (not massively) to the left of our country's 'mainstream' opinion.
6 Women climb the shard -the tallest building in London- to protest shell drilling for oil in the Arctic. Apparently the shard is in the middle of Shell's 3 London headquarters.
The government's gay marriage Bill is expected to become law by the end of this week, after the legislation cleared the House of Lords on Monday afternoon.
Peers gave the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill its third reading without a formal vote after approving an amendment that would see ministers examine the pension arrangements for gay couples.
The legislation will now return to the Commons on Tuesday evening where it is expected to be rubber stamped by MPs and sent to the Queen for Royal Assent by Thursday at the latest.
The government expects the first gay weddings to be able to take place in Summer 2014 following the completion of implementation work.
Speaking to a jubilant pro-gay marriage rally opposite parliament, Nick Clegg thanked campaigners for "keeping politicians feet to the fire" to ensure the Bill was not derailed by opponents.
"Once what was felt, or considered, to be a radical will soon be the law of the land," he said. "People will look back on it and think, 'what on Earth was the fuss all about'."
David Cameron has been accused of lying to the people of Britain by an angry woman at a celebration in the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park.
The Prime Minister was surrounded by excited volunteers from the London 2012 Olympic Games, and was accompanied by London Mayor Boris Johnson and Lord Coe, when Hilary Kerr unexpectedly began shouting at him about the NHS.
She said: "Mr Cameron, why did you say the NHS would be safe in your hands?
"You're privatising it."
The Prime Minister, who was right next to Ms Kerr, said: "Well, it is safe. We are saving the NHS. We're putting more money into it."
Ms Kerr shouted back: "Why do you lie to the British people?"
As the dense crowd around Mr Cameron looked on, one man shouted in support of him, saying: "We're with you!"
Grateful for the support, the Prime Minister said: "Thank you very much. It's not about politics today. It's about the Olympics. It's about volunteering."
It is not known whether Ms Kerr was a London 2012 volunteer.
Not that I have anything against the English. I spent most of my life in Sussex with my English father. However, I see both England and Scotland heading in two very different directions. I would also be happy with full devolution rather than completely splitting. The point is that in my opinion Westminster is not doing right by the Scottish people and that this needs to change. They have different norms and values to that of Scotland and is unlikely to change. We are two different countries, and should be treated as such both socially and politically.
Of course but how do you suppose to survive on your own ;_; Yes you want go in a different way but how are you going to afford to do that...
I always find this question quite bamboozling. Independently we would be one of the richest nations on earth. We have vast amounts of north-sea oil. We occupy the greatest areas on earth for both wind farms and tidal power. The latter is something we are investing in heavily to the point where are already at the stage where we can power 20% of the countries homes by tidal power alone. Whether we remain part of the EU is yet to be seen but if not we would save a pretty penny each day not forking out millions for membership. Scotland is a very technologically advanced country and is investing heavily in research and engineering. Our overall budget is crippled by Westminster yet we still manage to give our young students free University level education. I could go on.
Bottom line is that we would have absolutely no problem what so ever supporting ourselves.
Our budget isn't crippled by Westminster, Scotland gives more back to the treasury than it gets but by a negligible amount really, if we were an independent country we'd have to rely on the international bond market and we would be paying much more in interest.
David Cameron has been accused of lying to the people of Britain by an angry woman at a celebration in the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park.
The Prime Minister was surrounded by excited volunteers from the London 2012 Olympic Games, and was accompanied by London Mayor Boris Johnson and Lord Coe, when Hilary Kerr unexpectedly began shouting at him about the NHS.
She said: "Mr Cameron, why did you say the NHS would be safe in your hands?
"You're privatising it."
The Prime Minister, who was right next to Ms Kerr, said: "Well, it is safe. We are saving the NHS. We're putting more money into it."
Ms Kerr shouted back: "Why do you lie to the British people?"
As the dense crowd around Mr Cameron looked on, one man shouted in support of him, saying: "We're with you!"
Grateful for the support, the Prime Minister said: "Thank you very much. It's not about politics today. It's about the Olympics. It's about volunteering."
It is not known whether Ms Kerr was a London 2012 volunteer.
Draft guidance for the website NHS Choices warning that there is no evidence that homeopathy works was suppressed by officials following lobbying by a charity set up by the Prince of Wales.
Homeopathy, which involves the use of remedies so heavily diluted with water that they no longer contain any active substance, is "rubbish", said chief medical officer Sally Davies in January to the House of Commons science and technology committee. She added that she was "perpetually surprised" that homeopathy was available in some places on the NHS.
But the government's NHS Choices website, which is intended to offer evidence-based information and advice to the public on treatments, does not reflect her view. A draft page that spelled out the scientific implausibility of homeopathic remedies was neutered by Department of Health officials. It is now uncritical, with just links to reports on the lack of evidence.
Lobbying by opponents, and the response from DH officials who did not want to take on Prince Charles's now defunct Foundation for Integrated Medicine and other supporters of homeopathy, is revealed in correspondence from the department discussing the new guidance. It was released under the Freedom of Information Act to Prof David Colquhoun of University College London, a Fellow of the Royal Society and prominent science blogger.
There is no evidence that Prince Charles was involved personally in the lobbying.
By the end of next year, all 19million UK homes currently connected to the net will be contacted by service providers and told they must say whether family-friendly filters that block all porn sites should be switched on or off.
From the end of this year, all new customers setting up a broadband account or switching provider will have the filters automatically switched on unless they opt to disable them to allow sites with ‘adult content’.
‘The Daily Mail has campaigned hard to make internet search engine filters “default on”. Today they can declare that campaign a success,’ Mr Cameron said.
‘We are taking action to help clean up the internet and protect a generation of children from often extreme online pornography.’
On July 11 2013 09:35 KwarK wrote: I don't believe the BBC has any political leanings although that could just be that it generally agrees with me. I'm reasonably centrist by British standards.
I'd say the BBC is somewhat (not massively) to the left of our country's 'mainstream' opinion.
I heard the BBC leans left but wanted to see what the opinion was across the pond. They apparently vary between center and center left. I take it the Daily Mail is right leaning, the Guardian is left leaning, and editorials on the Sun & Daily Mirror tabloids are right and left respectively?
I guess the porn industry didn't have enough time/money to lobby against this. I'm sure Cameron is disappointed that his palms didn't receive any further greasing. So, can kill ourselves with alcohol or smokes, but porn is a NONO! In fact, why doesn't the government just completely take over raising our kids and teaching them values. I'm sure the parents will be too busy trying to remove their porn filters.