Why politicians should really leave sport alone. Part2

This week's second most gratuitous grab of a sporting event for purely partisan reasons:

DUP politician, whose blushes I shall spare, jokingly messaged on Sunday "McDowell wins US Open last year. McIlroy leading the Masters this year. The DUP delivering for Ulster!"

Ah, no.

Today after young Mr McIlroy's disastrous final round he updated with "McIlroy crashes out at US Masters golf. The reason for this major setback is obvious - UUP/Tory cuts!"

What next?
Salmond claiming an affinity with the Barca midfield ("world-class,   sleek and capable of steam-rolling any opposition")?

Tom Elliott threatening to do a Shakhtar Donetsk ("with all our team playing in the same direction , correct planet alignment and a few bob in the ref's back-pocket...we can overcome the overwhelming odds and triumph")?
sleekit

Unionist control of information-outflow now total in Scotland

A typical nationalist response as to why younger Scots are disconnected from the political process:

Maybe if the MSM gave a balanced account of what was truly going on instead of the one trick Unionist pony the kids would show more enthusiasm.

You Prof and the other London luvvies in "Scottish" Media distort things so much it is little wonder kids are not interested.

Ah right, the old "Unionist MSM lulling the Scottish Youth into a British false-consciousness" theory.
How many under 24s do you know now rely on the MSM for their news, "balanced" or otherwise?
Exactly.


I think the fact that Unionist Junta has also banned access to the internet for all Scots has much more to do with the lack of enthusiasm for Scottish independence and politics generally amongst the younger generation.

No. We are *not* "all entitled".

I had actually forgotten about this article on regional disparities which has been festering in my drafts for nearly a month now.

Some noteworthy statistics first of all:

1. Average GDP per head in central London is more than nine times larger than in parts of Wales.
2. The ratio of GDP per head in the three richest regions of the UK to the three poorest increased by almost a tenth between 1990 and 2009.
3. Real GDP per head fell by 6% during 2007-09 in poorer areas, such as Yorkshire, the Midlands and Northern Ireland, twice as much as in London.
4. According to the Centre for Cities, a think-tank, welfare benefits account for 28% of residents’ total income in Liverpool, compared with 14% in London.
5. Almost 40% of Liverpool’s jobs are in the public sector, compared with 22% in London.


Several caveats should be read along with that data above:

1. Central London’s income per head is increased by commuters who work in the city but do not live there.
2. The cost of living is cheaper in rural parts than in big cities, which also has the effect of exaggerating inequality.
3. Urban areas will always be wealthier than rural ones because of their higher productivity and their greater ability to attract companies and employees.


Still amongst the OECD countries looked at by the Economist, the UK has the widest regional disparity present in a whole range of factors.

That reality has detrimental effects on both national cohesiveness and, more concretely, the economic life of the UK but finding solutions is obviously a bit more troublesome than baldly stating the problem and should move beyond what was howled out by an activist at recent Labour shadow cabinet public meeting in Nottingham:

"We are entitled. We are all entitled, we live in a modern country."

Before concrete answers are looked at though, several facts needed to be accepted by all who have a genuine wish to see a long-term, structural improvement in such areas:

1. Cities in the north of England, N.Ireland, Scotland and Wales are too much dependent on public-sector jobs and welfare benefits.
2. Labour markets (and by extension people) must be more flexible, moving if needs be in search of work. Logically this should ultimately reduce the labour supply in areas of high unemployment.
3. Education and skills must be improved in poorer areas- one horrific fact mentioned is that only 21% of working-age people in Sunderland, have any form of higher education, compared with 39% of Londoners.

In all three cases, when admitting those facts, there is common a degree of personal responsibility which must be accepted by those who wish to see their area's and their own prospects improve. Money will also clearly be needed but it should never be the driving factor, if we are to see real and lasting change.

But while we all remain "entitled", what chance is there of that real and lasting change taking place?

The curse of living in interesting times

The ancient Inka Prophecy has predicted a time of shocks, upheaval and turmoil in the world round about this point in history.

In the UK we are beginning to see disturbing outworkings of that prediction:

1. Man City are currently third place in the Premiership.
2. An item of woman's intimate (black!!) apparel being flashed in a DUP PEB (50 seconds in if you're, er...interested in checking).
3. And now this from Scottish Unionist.


No.3 could a cybernat hacking attempt I suppose.... but what if it is genuine?

Scottish Labour versus the SNP. What? Oh yes, and the Conservatives

Alex Massie:

In the first place, both the SNP and Labour consider themselves "Scotland's Party". They are opposed, certainly, to the Conservatives but they're also opposed to Westminster, regardless of which party is in power in London. Their task is to "defend" Scotland come what may even if that means insisting that sensible public-sector reforms in England are not necessary in Scotland.

But of course it doesn't end there. Labour see the SNP as upstart usurpers, threatening their cherished position as the "natural" party of government. The SNP membership, meanwhile, correctly view Labour as a Unionist party. With support for independence no higher now than it was when Salmond first strode into Bute House it may seem as though the constitutional question has sidled into irrelevance but it's certainly not irrelevant to the true believers on either side

It's a good article which also touches on the astonishing (to this outsider anyway) level of enmity between the SNP and Scottish Labour, which I think is unmatched (even in good ole N.Ireland) in UK politics.

Devolution's lack of diversity:

From the Guardian:

Despite being set up to empower and involve the people of Scotland and Wales, both their devolved legislatures have been slow to include the countries' ethnic minorities. On this count at least, they have been arguably weaker than Westminster.

On the "diversity" question generally, both institutes are struggling.
Some figures to back up that assertion-

1. There are 170,000 people from an Asian, black or mixed race background among the Scottish electorate, 4% of the Scottish population but Holyrood has only ever had one non-white MSP elected.
2. Wales has an overall minority ethnic population of  3% of the population, yet it's first minority ethnic member was elected only in 2007.
3. In Scotland and Wales, gay rights groups believe the lesbian, gay and bisexual population (estimated to be 6% of the general population) is still "greatly under-represented in frontline politics".
4. It is predicted that  the number of women elected to Holyrood and the Welsh assembly on 5 May will be the lowest on record, Guardian has found less than 30% of the major parties' candidates will be women.

Almost goes without saying that the white, middle-aged, middle-class gentlemen's club that is Stormont is worse on all 3 counts- one ethnic minority, zero openly gay and a grand total  of 14 female MLAs out of a total of 108.
Not very impressive figures at all.

Never mind the quality, feeeel the cheapness.

One of the basic fundaments of UK politics is that parties don’t expect us to take anything contained or promised in their manifestos too literally but still, this proclamation from "Lynn of Co Antrim" does fall down on two crucial points:

“My DUP has delivered free prescriptions for everyone in Northern Ireland, the most generous scheme in the UK”

First, whose idea was the free prescription”?
Under the aegis of whose “ministry” was it introduced?

Secondly, both Wales since 2007 and Scotland (admittedly the day after Lyn of Antrim made her claim) since this year have also offered free prescriptions, so it’s not strictly accurate to call it the "most generous” scheme in the UK.

Incidently, I hope Lynn does indeed come from Antrim and not somewhere like Little Muck, Arizona....  the DUP did have one or two problems on that score before.

But as I said, no one reads manifestos, never mind believes the nonsense inside them. More important is how, as touched on by Owen Polley here, we look to improve upon the delivery of our health service and (management, trade-unionists and bureaucrats hold your breath now) ultimately “empower” patients and doctors (ie provide better healthcare, more efficiently)

In England, as the CEP have been quick to remind us this week, prescriptions have gone up from 7.20 pounds a week to 7.40.

On bare facts, devolution has, once again, delivered an unfair state of affairs.

However, despite those discrepancies in prescription prices:

Historically Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have had higher levels of NHS funding per capita thanEngland. The research confirms this but shows other striking and troubling differences between the four nations, some accentuated since devolution.

In particular, these were higher numbers of doctors, nurses and managers per head of population, lower crude productivity per staff member (particularly in Scotland), and a higher percentage of the population waiting for care in Wales and Northern Ireland than in England.

The analysis presented in this report suggests that England’s NHS spends less and has fewer staff per capita than the health services in the devolved countries, but that it makes better use of its resources with respect to delivering higher levels of activity and productivity and lower waiting times. Comparing the devolved nations with regions of England that are similar on a range of health and socio-economic indicators, the differences highlighted in the analysis are even more pronounced.

I posted that finding from the Nuttfield Trust just over a month ago.

So, English patients do pay prescription fees but also receive a better quality service than that “enjoyed” (or make that “endured”) by their fellow Brits in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Why?

Well, in my opinion, prescription prices, like University Tuition fees, have become the Devocracy’s populist rallying call in the hope that the short-term dust the debate throws up blinds the electorate to the fact that in both areas nasty truths have only been temporarily postponed.

Actually, it’s only one nasty core truth- society is not prepared to pay the extra money needed, or make the sacrifices required (eg unemployment resulting from streamlining the NHS or less students attending university) to deliver the kind of high-quality health service or third level education system they demand.

The Devocrats in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales know that fact and as a consequence have taken the coward’s way out:

“You get a worse health service than the English and it’s getting worse but hey, we don’t charge you prescription charges"

or:

“The quality delivered by our universities is going down the pan but sure, if we don’t charge you to attend them in the first place who cares?”

In the ideal world (ie around about one generation ago) we could get away with free (OK, that was always a misnomer because somewhere down the line someone did have to pay) university education and prescriptions. We’d all also be 100% happy with the service offered by the health service and third-level educational institutes.
But both demographically and economically, we most certainly don’t live in that ideal world.

 I don’t want to pay for my prescriptions and in the far-off future, I don’t want to have my offspring paying to attend university. But I also demand better than adequate healthcare and high-quality third-level education- how do the devocrats in Belfast, Cardiff and Edinburgh propose to square that circle?
Shush- I think I can just about hear the pitter-patter of a tactical retreat.

A bandwagon is starting to roll? And taxi for Gregory Campbell please.

Following John Redwood's revelation the other day, this from the Monmouth Conservative MP (and as staunch a Unionist MP as you'll find in the UK), David Davies:

Mr Davies said: “As a proud Welshman and a unionist we cannot possibly have a situation where we as Welsh MPs are telling the English what to do with their health service and education and they can’t have any say over what goes on in Wales. Surely the answer for all unionists, all across the United Kingdom, is to give the English their own parliament with similar powers to the Welsh and Scottish parliaments and have some kind of federal structure dealing with everything else that matters to the United Kingdom?”

And there was more:

But London Tory MP Mark Field told him: "There is one leg, and rather an important leg, of the United Kingdom, that feels under-represented and unloved, which is one of the reasons this West Lothian question is becoming more high profile in England."

And more:

Totnes Tory MP Sarah Wollaston said there was a great feeling of unfairness within English constituencies. "We feel under-represented but equally we feel over-taxed and we wonder how it is we can be subsidising university education for Scottish pupils and how we can be subsidising free prescription charges."

And more:

The Constitutional Affairs Minister, Mark Harper, who is Tory MP for the Forest of Dean, said: "The English-Welsh border has become more of a border, more of a real barrier, since devolution, than it was beforehand. That is certainly the experience of my constituents."

I've previously said that the growth of an anti-Conservative and, by extension, anti-London, tendency within Scottish and Welsh Labour could start to pull that party in narrow, regionalist directions;  it seems now that also many of the English Conservatives are looking to "federalise" the supremacy of Westminster out of existence. How they propose to do that whilst strengthening the Union has not been satisfactorily explained.

And the sole Northern Irish contribution from Gregory Campbell wasn't his finest hour in the House:

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the United Kingdom's cohesion and unity might be helped just a little if the Prime Minister made more visits to the countries of the UK-Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland? He has not been to Northern Ireland since the general election.

Errr... who's that bloke then standing beside Owen Paterson?  Top-class research there Gregory.

And while you sort that out, you should also get cracking on alternatives to the English Parliament and "English Votes for English Measures" if you genuinely think they would weaken the Union because The West Lothian Question and the corresponding English resentment aren't going to disappear anytime soon- there needs to be an urgent Unionist solution to both problems.

Ethnicity is "broadly equivalent, only differing" in Scotland and England

More Census ethnicity nonsense (thanks to JD!).

To ask Her Majesty's Government why the 2011 census question on ethnic group in England and Wales had five options for "White" when the Scottish version had nine options which included Polish, and has a different wording for Gypsy or Irish Traveller which excludes the word "Irish"; and how overall United Kingdom figures will be calculated and displayed given those differences.[HL7713]

A  very good question, not very adequately answered:

In England and Wales the form and content of the ethnicity questions have resulted from extensive consultation with users and other key stakeholders as part of a formal consultation exercise on census topics....blah, blah, blah.

Whereas:

In Scotland, a wide-ranging review of the way that ethnicity was classified was undertaken following the 2001 census, to ensure the development of a classification for use in Scottish surveys that reflected modern circumstances, met users' information needs and had broad community support... blah, blah, blah

So, to summarise: in both cases, extensive research into the issue was apparently done.

The "White" categories are broadly equivalent, only differing, in Scotland, in the addition of a "Polish" category-where this group form a significantly larger proportion of the ethnic minority population than in England and Wales, justifying a separate tick box-and a separate category for "Scottish" to provide consistency with the 2001 question. The omission of "Irish" from the title of the new "Gypsy/Traveller" group reflected particular sensitivities to the wording of this category in Scotland.

So, to summarise: whereas it is possible to define yourself as a "white Pole" in Scotland you are simply, I guess, "white" in England because there is proportionally less of you there.
You also may not be an Irish Traveller in Scotland as the word "Irish" is more sensitive north of Hadrian's Wall than in England. Have I got it right?
 
For the Census to have any meaningful value whatsover, shouldn't there be a "consistency" between the different parts of the UK as well as with the previous local versions?

SNP to dictate students' their national identity?

I was fortunate enough to attend one of Northern Ireland's more liberal grammar schools, which meant (in those comparitively less liberal times) I got a pretty good grounding in both Irish literature and history. I've been told that it's just a question of time before Irish gaelic will be taught there as an optional subject.

I think studying the likes of O'Casey and Behan and having to put ourselves in the shoes of Pearse and Connolly in 1916 helped us attain a more rounded view of both the island and our own place in it. But context was also taught. Irish literature and history, after all, don't exist independent to the rest of the world. Pushing "national" history, literature and language into one narrowly defined category of "Irish studies" would have for that and other reasons been a retrograde step:

A new subject of ‘Scottish studies’ would be introduced in the country’s schools under a plan to increase youngsters’ awareness of their national identity, the education minister has said.

Speaking at the SNP’s pre-election conference, Mike Russell said children would learn about Scottish history, geography and literature, as well as the Scots and Gaelic languages, under a single banner.

What has the Scottish Government Ever Done for Us? SNP Political Broadca...

This is a rather good SNP PEB...

Not a mention though of the raison d'etre of the party, separation from the rest of the United Kingdom- curious that;)

Oh FFS...

The piece preceeding actually hits pretty well the targets it sets out to hit... but open up the comments and inevitably in rush the cybernat loons.

RaboRuglen:

At no time have I ever visited either Ibrox or Parkhead, however neither can I ever recall having seen any Saltires within the crowds (or outside the venues) at these matches on TV - plenty of Union flags and Tricolours though!

Make no mistake about it this malaise is a product of and sustained by the Union. Come Independence it will be seen for the historically anachronistic, irrelevant and destructive force that it is. Deprived of its sustaining forces it will wither away.

Come the Glorious Day and the Celtic and Rangers bigots will awake from their false consciousness and exchange their centuries-old engrained sectarianism for a civic, secular, independent Scottish identity?

Three into one would go?

I suppose in the wake of last week's result, this was inevitable:

MPs have suggested merging the UK government departments responsible for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.


A report by a Commons committee recommends a "serious look" at the Whitehall arrangements for the three devolved nations.

Devolution has removed most of the powers from the job (of the Welsh Office) and its counterparts in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

A counter-argument could run that it is the three Offices which are helping to curb the more extreme tendencies of the Devocrats, but it is the staffing figures which are most interesting:

The Wales Office employs 60 staff, the Scottish Office 100 and the Northern Ireland Office 110.

The NIO really needs double the amount of their counterparts in Wales?

Quote of the day

Michael Keating, The political economy of independence:

The North Atlantic periphery, and Europe more widely, provide a range of very different models of small nations adapting to global markets. There is a neo-liberal model, associated with some of the central and east European states (an extreme example is Estonia) and in some respects Ireland. This involves competing on low taxes, light regulation, flexible wages and labour markets, and inward investment. The corollary is an under-developed welfare state.

There is a section of opinion in Scotland that has recently been pushing this idea, for example through Reform Scotland and some sections of the media. As the Thatcher government found and the current UK government is finding out, however, it is not as easy as it might seem to roll back an existing mature welfare state.

The low-tax strategy is much easier in a country that has not developed its welfare services, where family and other networks bear much of the cost of adjustment, and where citizens and workers are ready to accept fluctuations in the individual and the social wage because they remember how dire things were before. There is no evidence that such a strategy has a political market in Scotland.

Arguing that it is an 'either-or" as opposed to an "and-and".

Blatter talking once again with forked tongue?

Is there anyone left who takes what this old fraud says seriously anymore?

Fifa boss Sepp Blatter says the Celtic nations' international status would not be affected by their players' turning out for a Great Britain Olympic team.

The British Olympic Association hopes Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland will join England in fielding a team in the 2012 London Games.

But each of the Celtic nations has expressed fears that doing so could harm their independence in the game.

But Blatter said: "It's very clear. If they play, there is no sanction."

The FA clearly don't.

Plastic patriots costing 80k a year

My initial thought is that any true red-blooded patriot wouldn't be seen dead waving a plastic flag anyway:

THE Scottish government have spent £300,000 on plastic flags since coming to office, it was revealed yesterday.

The SNP administration ordered almost 150,000 Saltires to be handed out at national events.

But last night there was anger over the "profligate" spending - equal to three junior nurses' wages during the time the Nats have been in charge.The flags have been given out to councils for use on St Andrew's Day, Scotland Week and Burns Night.

Second thought is that if a true red-blooded patriot is forced to accept a free plastic flag, then they should be expected to keep it in pristine shape for the next hooley...and that, to be fair, is kind of borne out by the decreasing figures:

In 2007/08, the incoming SNP administration ordered 79,800 flags at a cost of £173,750. This was a jump of more than £41,000 on Labour's spending the previous year.

Since then, they have ordered a further 40,000 Saltires for £89,600 in 2008/09. The following year they bought 30,000 more for £52,200.

In all, they have spent £315,850 on 149,800 polyester flags in the past four years.

The funniest bit in the whole piece?

The current order was placed with a Canadian company, RR Donnelley.

Quote of the day

Alexander McKay:

Where Eddie Barnes is right on the button is in suggesting that Sir David, and many others, are reasonably happy in the knowledge that the SNP can chunter along indefinitely in minority power as long as the party's core belief, its very raison d'être, is almost never mentioned and kept well under wraps. So it seems are a fair chunk of the electorate.

The result is that we now have in Scotland the absurdity of a nationalist administration run by people who are well aware that the one thing they know for sure will cost them the election is pushing their Holy Grail of the break-up of the UK

Overcharge the goose and the golden egg will be laid elsewhere...

From the Scotsman:

"We could end up in a situation where it makes no sense for English students to keep coming to Scotland in the same numbers they do now."

...a prospect which is delighting at least one of the cybernat xenophobes:

Good, allowing Scots to be educated in our universities in greater numbers.

Currently some Scottish Universities have less than 50% Scottish students.

The argument the SNP are putting is slightly more nuanced than that of such monoculturalist supporters. It's not that they don't want outsiders in Scottish universities; in fact the fines fees they would be expected to pay for being English/N.Irish/Welsh are essential for the financial well-being of the Scottish system:

"...striking and troubling differences between the four nations, some accentuated since devolution."

The Nuttfield Trust have published a report (pdf) on the UK's balkanised health service:

Historically Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have had higher levels of NHS funding per capita thanEngland. The research confirms this but shows other striking and troubling differences between the four nations, some accentuated since devolution.

In particular, these were higher numbers of doctors, nurses and managers per head of population, lower crude productivity per staff member (particularly in Scotland), and a higher percentage of the population waiting for care in Wales and Northern Ireland than in England.

The analysis presented in this report suggests that England’s NHS spends less and has fewer staff per capita than the health services in the devolved countries, but that it makes better use of its resources with respect to delivering higher levels of activity and productivity and lower waiting times. Comparing the devolved nations with regions of England that are similar on a range of health and socio-economic indicators, the differences highlighted in the analysis are even more pronounced.

Well done Devolution.

And what's wrong with celebrating insanity and hangovers?

No further comment really needed:

THE SNP have moved the St Andrew's Day holiday to give staff a long weekend - but it now clashes with a feast for the patron saint of INSANITY and HANGOVERS.

Scots will celebrate our national day on November 30 - a Wednesday this year. So the government is giving staff the time off two days later on Friday December 2 instead.

That day is also the feast day of Saint Bibiana, the patron saint of the mentally ill and boozed-up