Queue for SC Respondants...

[Paddy]

Firstly, I don't care for DC at all.

However, how Scooter can compare someone selling their memoirs, in a commercial transaction, to someone blatantly stealing from the public purse I really don't know.

Obviously, Salmond does a lot for charidee.

So did Pablo Escobar

This is not £800,000 for memories worth about £2.99 in the bookshop. This is a well establish way of payback for favours done. Someone pays the publisher, the publisher pays Cameron, the end result is a few books go on sale to make the deal seem legitimate.

[MrMarkyMark]

Funnily enough, many years ago when she was Health Minister, I went to a work conference that she was invited to, and she made a very decent speech on a complex issue that is typically screwed up. Of course, she may have had a good writer, briefer or whatever, but it was a rare display of ministerial competence. I'm not really sure where the hostility is coming from.

If you looked like and were compared to Jimmy Krankie, on a regular basis, you might be angry too

[MrMarkyMark]

This is not £800,000 for memories worth about £2.99 in the bookshop. This is a well establish way of payback for favours done. Someone pays the publisher, the publisher pays Cameron, the end result is a few books go on sale to make the deal seem legitimate.

I wouldn't doubt that for a moment.
As I stated in a post earlier they are nearly all at it.

[jamesbrown]

What an awfully badly draft document by Parliament. It has references to the UK and to Great Britain as if they are the same. This opens a can of worms especially for the NI Parliament (who are bringing separate legal action).

It does seem that technically A50 will need consent of Scotland and NI, but much depends on how far Scotland and NI are willing to take their cases

The term Britain is frequently used as a synonym for the UK, as distinct from Great Britain (which is sometimes used, incorrectly, as a loose synonym, but wouldn't be appropriate here). Arguably, they should be more careful over terminology, and I'd agree, but they aren't wrong in their application of "Britain" as a shorthand for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. They use the term Britain once, and they don't use it to mean GB specifically. I think they understand the scope of the UK Parliament.

More importantly, they understand the scope of treaty negotiation and notification. Thus, your second point is simply incorrect.

[jamesbrown]

Funnily enough, many years ago when she was Health Minister, I went to a work conference that she was invited to, and she made a very decent speech on a complex issue that is typically screwed up. Of course, she may have had a good writer, briefer or whatever, but it was a rare display of ministerial competence. I'm not really sure where the hostility is coming from.

I don't have any hostility towards her. She's an excellent politician. However, she has a very specific MO with which I completely disagree and it's through that lens that her analysis must be considered. I'm not questioning her capacity to understand technicalities. Rather, I am questioning her use of that understanding. She is, afterall, a politician.