So, does anyone have an example of an "English Law"? That is, a law which applies in England and not in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. And, to be clear, I am not referring to UK laws which are varied within Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland; I am referring only to laws which have been created only for implementation within England?
I can't think of any. But there must be some really important ones, otherwise the Tories wouldn't have been banging on about it since the last century. Surely?
The fact is is that there are hardly any. Because there is no devolved English chamber, matters that are devolved to the different nations that go through Westminster often include parts relevant to the other nations (for example, most English NHS bills will mention how it will interact with the other NHS systems in the other nations). There is also the issue that not all the devolved chambers are equal - Scotland has more powers than Wales, which has more powers than N. Ireland. So a bill that doesn't affect Scotland could affect Wales. A bill that doesn't affect Scotland or Wales could affect N. Ireland.
The fact is the SNP does regularly abstain on votes in which they do not feel affects Scotland, including education and health spending votes. Whether or not you feel there is no existence of an 'England-only' law, the fact is the SNP MPs do recognise that there is a convention that if the matter is devolved, they should not be voting on it and it is only recently they have begun to break this convention when it could be argued that they had little justification for doing so. This SNP piece from 2006 is a perfect example of their understanding of the convention: it was a devolved matter and even they use the term 'England-only votes' to describe it (although technically the law that banned smoking in England was the same law that banned it in Wales, hence my previous point that most laws that affect England on a devolved issue usually affect another country).
If we had to start from scratch, the most rational course of action on devolution would have been to have chosen which areas should be devolved, then create 4 executives in each nation to be elected and vote on these measures. Then, at a national level, MPs and MEPs would be voted.
I’ve made no secret of my admiration for Russell Brand. His stance is more nuanced than the widely quoted ‘don’t vote’. Instead he is asking politicians to give us something worth voting for. Brand’s message isn’t one of apathy – he’s the physical embodiment of the act of spoiling a ballot paper.
In this context, Miliband’s decision to consent to an interview with him was really smart. With a million subscribers, The Trews represents an audience politicians couldn’t otherwise access. The YouTube generation find the notion of debating issues across coloured podiums bizarre, mainstream news channels tedious, and party political broadcasts embarrassing. These are the Trews devotees and they’re a demographic who could, if galvanised towards a polling station, ensure victory for one of the main parties.
The resulting fifteen minute video was far from flawless. There were times when Miliband slipped into ‘Dad at a disco’ mode (see his repeated use of the phrase it ‘aint gonna happen’ which felt odd coming from the otherwise classically enunciating mouth of a privately educated man). Equally, there were moments when Brand resembled a seventeen year old sixth former being lectured on the realities of life by his A-Level history teacher. Whilst magnificent when given uninterrupted opportunity to rant, Brand is less skilled as an interrogator – At any moment I expected him to stamp his feet and scream ‘BUT IT’S NOT FAAAAAAIR!’.
Yet my overwhelming feeling after having watched the interview was that it was authentic, and that in being so it had unwittingly revealed so much of the pre-election build-up to be the opposite. By comparison, the televised debates and interviews were both staid and staged. There was, without question, genuine passion on both sides of the Brand/Miliband exchange and being exposed to it made me long for more of that sentiment in the broader political sphere.
It came as no surprise that, ultimately, these two left-leaning men, both in their own ways champions for the rights of ordinary working people, found common ground. That was, in retrospect, inevitable.
For all its flaws, what Brand released into the cyber sphere today represented an entirely new breed of political discourse. In not ignoring the established parameters of televised debate, it felt as though Brand genuinely bought us one step closer to influencing and understanding the higher echelons of power. It was exciting. More, please.
I’ve made no secret of my admiration for Russell Brand. His stance is more nuanced than the widely quoted ‘don’t vote’. Instead he is asking politicians to give us something worth voting for. Brand’s message isn’t one of apathy – he’s the physical embodiment of the act of spoiling a ballot paper.
In this context, Miliband’s decision to consent to an interview with him was really smart. With a million subscribers, The Trews represents an audience politicians couldn’t otherwise access. The YouTube generation find the notion of debating issues across coloured podiums bizarre, mainstream news channels tedious, and party political broadcasts embarrassing. These are the Trews devotees and they’re a demographic who could, if galvanised towards a polling station, ensure victory for one of the main parties.
The resulting fifteen minute video was far from flawless. There were times when Miliband slipped into ‘Dad at a disco’ mode (see his repeated use of the phrase it ‘aint gonna happen’ which felt odd coming from the otherwise classically enunciating mouth of a privately educated man). Equally, there were moments when Brand resembled a seventeen year old sixth former being lectured on the realities of life by his A-Level history teacher. Whilst magnificent when given uninterrupted opportunity to rant, Brand is less skilled as an interrogator – At any moment I expected him to stamp his feet and scream ‘BUT IT’S NOT FAAAAAAIR!’.
Yet my overwhelming feeling after having watched the interview was that it was authentic, and that in being so it had unwittingly revealed so much of the pre-election build-up to be the opposite. By comparison, the televised debates and interviews were both staid and staged. There was, without question, genuine passion on both sides of the Brand/Miliband exchange and being exposed to it made me long for more of that sentiment in the broader political sphere.
It came as no surprise that, ultimately, these two left-leaning men, both in their own ways champions for the rights of ordinary working people, found common ground. That was, in retrospect, inevitable.
For all its flaws, what Brand released into the cyber sphere today represented an entirely new breed of political discourse. In not ignoring the established parameters of televised debate, it felt as though Brand genuinely bought us one step closer to influencing and understanding the higher echelons of power. It was exciting. More, please.
Just watched the interview and I thought it was actually pretty good. Brand has an agenda but I thought Miliband answered him fairly comfortably. It was a risk, I'm not quite sure what Miliband was hoping to gain from it but I think he came across quite well.
Prague, I think the answer lies as I suggested in 'comparative advantage' - in short it states that a country should try to specialise in areas where its 'advantage' is the highest because it can acquire through trade what it needs in areas where its advantage is smaller (or is not an advantage at all).
To use an example that might make sense to a non-economist, I'm better at earning money than my wife is but I'd argue I'm also better than she is at cooking, childcare and ironing. However my comparative advantage in the former is much greater than it is in the latter, so I go to work and she stays at home!
I think we patently are better at financial services than most of the rest of the world (and we have the tens of thousands of highly-educated and highly-paid foreign staff working in the City and related sub-sectors to prove it) - and there are huge network effects which will ensure this remains the case for a very long time (barring something dumb from a potential Labour government). This is of course not to suggest that the meltdown of RBS, HBOS etc. was not a monumental failure on several levels, including regulatory as I noted earlier.
It's natural for people to think that somehow the export of a Miele washing machine is more useful than the export of services, but if Miele in turn are hedging their currency risk etc. with a UK-based investment bank (because they have a market-making comparative advantage) then this generates income here just as readily as the washing machines do in Germany.
However perhaps unsurprisingly we haven't generated an overall current account surplus since 1982, despite a substantial surplus from services and the above investment income. If you think that the UK is in a worse place economically today than it was in 1982 despite these current account deficits then I'd respectfully suggest you are mistaken.
We are however by definition the recipients of substantial foreign direct investment and portfolio investment (which is part of the required offset to any current account deficit we may generate as a result of not selling enough washing machines)!
is there a poll out there that tells how things would look if we had the "2nd vote" ...?
it would have prevented any SNP issues
But if the SNP vote suddenly collapsed between now and polling day and all the Scottish seats went to Labour resulting in a majority Labour government would you not still have the issue of Scottish MPs imposing a Labour government on the rest of the UK?
Do the current Scottish Labour MPs follow this convention of not voting on matters that only affect England?
Brand's main issue appeared to be imprison the "bad bankers". I thought Brand was invading Miliband's personal space & it looked like he was going to kiss/jump on him.
What Brand wants isn't really evil though is it? Why should people have to defend the wish for a fairer society? The problem is, Brand's way of achieving it will never work. Miliband is right in what he says in that interview, which I found very interesting.
I think a lot of people might not really grasp the concept of campaigning. It means getting yourself and your message out there. It is relevant to show that Miliband is getting more hits/searches - he is and has been doing much more of what Cameron should be doing in this election. In a week's time people vote.
I would imagine those that searched did so because they liked what they heard from Ed and wanted to check him out. I agree with Muttley. Ed has danced rings around Dave on the election trail so far.
se9 & Chizz - you've both missed the point of my post.
The issue England is likely going to face is that the Tories will be the largest party in England in terms of MPs and could in fact have an absolute majority in England. However Labour MPs + SNP MPs could and likely will outnumber Tory MPs across the UK. Lets say there is a vote on a bill on a devolved matter, such as university funding or social care or the NHS. Typically, Scottish MPs would not vote on these matters in Westminster as the bill going through Westminster would only affect England. However lets say there is an English NHS bill going through the Commons on an issue that Labour and Tories are divided on. The Tories would normally win it as the Scottish MPs should, by convention, abstain, however with the language Sturgeon has been using over the last few weeks, she would be willing to order her party to vote with Labour and against the Tories, as long as Labour were willing to vote with the SNP on a national matter.
As such, English MPs democratically elected by English voters would be overruled on a purely English matter because of the votes of Scottish MPs, yet English MPs cannot do the same for a bill on the Scottish NHS as no English politicians sit in Holyrood.
I believe you are factually correct, but with respect it does sort of miss the point.
Anyone who is a unionist believes that the sum of our parts is greater than our individual strengths. This surely has to recognise that parts of the union are different. Scotland , less populated , great natural resources , large coastline, extensive fishing etc. England , much greater population , creating wealth from London, farming in the North and West , food growth in the East. If one wants to create an "equal "weighting in parliament , then we are sure to break the union. Why would Scotland want to stay on that basis. It is our difference and uniqueness that creates the beauty and strength of the union.
In essence comparing like with like doesn't work for the unique countries that make up GB
Conservatives win most seats. Labour form some form of coalition. Foreign investment into the UK stalls, the pound crashes and a new election within 18 months sees this thread revived from the ashes just like the Andy Delort one.
Conservatives win most seats. Labour form some form of coalition. Foreign investment into the UK stalls, the pound crashes and a new election within 18 months sees this thread revived from the ashes just like the Andy Delort one.
Well after living in Maidstone for three years it turns out that my MP isn't in fact Helen Grant with a majority of 5,800 - despite the fact that when I lived five miles out of Maidstone, she was.
I found out yesterday, that I'm actually in the Faversham and Mid Kent Constituency and the sitting Tory MP had a majority of over 17,000.
All that worry about 'tactical voting' when in fact my vote matters not a jot. Still, at least now I have the Monster Raving Loony Party option.
I'd argue the service sector is on average less prone to foreign competition than the manufacturing sector.
Emerging economies can already produce world class manufactured goods (eg. Samsung, Embraer, Lenovo, Hyundai....) but can't hope in the medium term to recreate the networks, trust, governance etc. and most importantly attract the talent required to compete in the sectors we excel in.
Germany in my view is getting squeezed by its Eurozone commitments on the one hand and foreign competition on the other (including the resurgence of Japan).
I suppose that is true in the sense that you can reconfigure a service business to respond to threats more quickly than you can a manufacturing one.
Germany. Excuse me everyone that I keep banging on about the place, but having lived two hours from the border for the last 22 years, and thus having good sight of it without actually living there, I find it one of the most instructive experiences of my life. Just before I left the UK in 1993, there were lots of voices in the City scoffing that Germany was the "sick man of Europe" - they assumed the Thatcher reforms had created a leaner fitter Britain, whereas Germany had taken a deep breath and embraced the East, at a one to one deutschmark exchange rate.I almost started to believe them until a mate of mine who'd become a big shot in the brewery business, said to me "they laugh at the Germans, but you'll see. They will be back, bigger and stronger than ever". And by the heavens, it took a while but he was right. And it took a while because the Germans think long term. When they build a stretch of motorway you don't find it closed again six months later for "essential repairs". What they have achieved in the East is colossal. It has taken them time and the political blowback is still going on, but go there and then tell me you are not impressed, and that you don't see the potential of all this investment. Roland Duchatelet has certainly seen it.
I look around my house. Kitchen: the whole thing, both furniture and appliances, German, including the little cheap ones. Vacuum cleaner, Miele. Garden, Bosch mower, shredder, Gardena hose stuff. It wasn't a conscience decision and they all work. The Bosch washer dryer is nearly 20 years old and its been faultless. The only way the Brits and the Japs get a look in is in the hi fi (took the amp in for repair last month) and AV systems, and the Jap stuff is mainly old. Samsung TV. Funny enough my car is French, after 16 years of driving Toyota. Most Czechs aspire to a German car, and Skoda is essentially German,
But those are the big names. What people in the UK ignore is that the German economy is powered by small and medium size companies which often are the main employer in a similar size town. For example, Faber Castell who make pencils, still, just as they did when I was at school. Or the headphone brand Sennheiser.
Thats is why at the risk of being a broken record I exhort everyone to look at how the Germans do things and ask if that isn't better than how we do it in the UK. Starting with the administration of professional football.
Tschuss!
Obviously it's no secret that Germany is a manufacturing powerhouse but the theory of comparative advantage (see here for example: http://internationalecon.com/Trade/Tch40/T40-0.php) implies that it would be as silly for say the UK to try to compete with Germany in cars or household appliances as it would for Germany to try to compete with the UK in hedge funds or insurance.
To use a more topical example, Apple is a $750bn company created from nothing in just a few decades. Most of that wealth generation has accrued to the US (also indirectly via its workers' wages etc.) yet virtually none of the manufacturing process occurs in the US. Why? Because the US has an edge in technology, design, marketing, finance (for capital-raising) etc. but not in large scale manufacturing - most importantly all of the 'margin' is in the former not the latter! (if you want to make a teenager cry, put an HTC phone under their Christmas tree!).
It's also not true to suggest that the UK does not have a manufacturing base - a quick look at the largest companies in the FTSE100 shows GlaxoSmithKline, BAT, AstraZeneca, Rolls Royce etc. However I would agree we don't have the network of small businesses that Germany (or even Italy) has but I don't see that it matters a great deal.
. Away from the other world of the City, what do we do better, and why are we better at it? Genuine question. I've heard it said our insurance industry is more efficient than in other European countries . But we don't seem much good at exporting that expertise, and there's only so much insurance a domestic market needs.
I think you're not looking in the right place. An acquaintance, a QC, tells me he's making a very good living shuttling backwards and forwards to China dealing with shipping disputes because a lot of cargo contracts are written under UK law. He's says that's because a very significant percentage (over 20% I think he said) of marine insurance is written in the UK. So, I suspect it's not just that the foreign carriers feel more comfortable dealing with a UK rather than a Chinese insurer but also because they feel more comfortable knowing any disputes will be dealt with under the auspices of the UK legal system and they'll get a fair outcome. (And get paid if they have a claim?)
I'm guessing that we're also in a similar position regarding aviation insurance where I believe London is the World's largest market. Then there's reinsurance too. I haven't read the downloads but as you asked the question, you'll find this site londonmarketgroup.co.uk/ has a pdf on London's competitive situation. It seems to say London writes over £69bn of gross insurance premia per year. So it's not just my contents insurance then
Well after living in Maidstone for three years it turns out that my MP isn't in fact Helen Grant with a majority of 5,800 - despite the fact that when I lived five miles out of Maidstone, she was.
I found out yesterday, that I'm actually in the Faversham and Mid Kent Constituency and the sitting Tory MP had a majority of over 17,000.
All that worry about 'tactical voting' when in fact my vote matters not a jot. Still, at least now I have the Monster Raving Loony Party option.
Same constituency as myself... I think it must be one of the safest Tory seats in the country.
Brand's main issue appeared to be imprison the "bad bankers". I thought Brand was invading Miliband's personal space & it looked like he was going to kiss/jump on him.
I thought Miliband did well to deal with Brand.
Brand really is on the banker bashing bus. I remember seeing that article on the news a few months ago when he tried 'storm' the building of one of these banks (can't remember which one).
There was also a witty letter written by one of the bank's workers who I think had a back office role and because of Brand's antics, couldn't get back into his office to eat his lunch.
Well after living in Maidstone for three years it turns out that my MP isn't in fact Helen Grant with a majority of 5,800 - despite the fact that when I lived five miles out of Maidstone, she was.
I found out yesterday, that I'm actually in the Faversham and Mid Kent Constituency and the sitting Tory MP had a majority of over 17,000.
All that worry about 'tactical voting' when in fact my vote matters not a jot. Still, at least now I have the Monster Raving Loony Party option.
Same constituency as myself... I think it must be one of the safest Tory seats in the country.
I think my constituency has a 17,000 Labour majority, likely to grow given the Lib Dems are the second party !
Comments
The fact is the SNP does regularly abstain on votes in which they do not feel affects Scotland, including education and health spending votes. Whether or not you feel there is no existence of an 'England-only' law, the fact is the SNP MPs do recognise that there is a convention that if the matter is devolved, they should not be voting on it and it is only recently they have begun to break this convention when it could be argued that they had little justification for doing so. This SNP piece from 2006 is a perfect example of their understanding of the convention: it was a devolved matter and even they use the term 'England-only votes' to describe it (although technically the law that banned smoking in England was the same law that banned it in Wales, hence my previous point that most laws that affect England on a devolved issue usually affect another country).
If we had to start from scratch, the most rational course of action on devolution would have been to have chosen which areas should be devolved, then create 4 executives in each nation to be elected and vote on these measures. Then, at a national level, MPs and MEPs would be voted.
Just watched the interview and I thought it was actually pretty good. Brand has an agenda but I thought Miliband answered him fairly comfortably. It was a risk, I'm not quite sure what Miliband was hoping to gain from it but I think he came across quite well.
To use an example that might make sense to a non-economist, I'm better at earning money than my wife is but I'd argue I'm also better than she is at cooking, childcare and ironing. However my comparative advantage in the former is much greater than it is in the latter, so I go to work and she stays at home!
I think we patently are better at financial services than most of the rest of the world (and we have the tens of thousands of highly-educated and highly-paid foreign staff working in the City and related sub-sectors to prove it) - and there are huge network effects which will ensure this remains the case for a very long time (barring something dumb from a potential Labour government). This is of course not to suggest that the meltdown of RBS, HBOS etc. was not a monumental failure on several levels, including regulatory as I noted earlier.
It's natural for people to think that somehow the export of a Miele washing machine is more useful than the export of services, but if Miele in turn are hedging their currency risk etc. with a UK-based investment bank (because they have a market-making comparative advantage) then this generates income here just as readily as the washing machines do in Germany.
However perhaps unsurprisingly we haven't generated an overall current account surplus since 1982, despite a substantial surplus from services and the above investment income. If you think that the UK is in a worse place economically today than it was in 1982 despite these current account deficits then I'd respectfully suggest you are mistaken.
We are however by definition the recipients of substantial foreign direct investment and portfolio investment (which is part of the required offset to any current account deficit we may generate as a result of not selling enough washing machines)!
But if the SNP vote suddenly collapsed between now and polling day and all the Scottish seats went to Labour resulting in a majority Labour government would you not still have the issue of Scottish MPs imposing a Labour government on the rest of the UK?Do the current Scottish Labour MPs follow this convention of not voting on matters that only affect England?
"How to get Ed Miliband out of clothes"
"Is Ed Miliband in ISIS?"
Brand's main issue appeared to be imprison the "bad bankers". I thought Brand was invading Miliband's personal space & it looked like he was going to kiss/jump on him.
I thought Miliband did well to deal with Brand.
If David Cameron had a dump outside NO 10, no doubt his Google searches will soar !
Anyone who is a unionist believes that the sum of our parts is greater than our individual strengths. This surely has to recognise that parts of the union are different. Scotland , less populated , great natural resources , large coastline, extensive fishing etc. England , much greater population , creating wealth from London, farming in the North and West , food growth in the East. If one wants to create an "equal "weighting in parliament , then we are sure to break the union. Why would Scotland want to stay on that basis. It is our difference and uniqueness that creates the beauty and strength of the union.
In essence comparing like with like doesn't work for the unique countries that make up GB
Vote Tory to stop SNP running the country
The Scottish Sun front page tomorrow
Why it's time to vote SNP
Conservatives win most seats. Labour form some form of coalition. Foreign investment into the UK stalls, the pound crashes and a new election within 18 months sees this thread revived from the ashes just like the Andy Delort one.
I just didn't realize so many people lived on houseboats.
I found out yesterday, that I'm actually in the Faversham and Mid Kent Constituency and the sitting Tory MP had a majority of over 17,000.
All that worry about 'tactical voting' when in fact my vote matters not a jot. Still, at least now I have the Monster Raving Loony Party option.
I'm guessing that we're also in a similar position regarding aviation insurance where I believe London is the World's largest market.
Then there's reinsurance too. I haven't read the downloads but as you asked the question, you'll find this site londonmarketgroup.co.uk/ has a pdf on London's competitive situation. It seems to say London writes over £69bn of gross insurance premia per year. So it's not just my contents insurance then
There was also a witty letter written by one of the bank's workers who I think had a back office role and because of Brand's antics, couldn't get back into his office to eat his lunch.
http://www.hedgeho.com/hot-gossip/bankers-open-letter-to-russell-brand-hilarious/