text:
Nicola Sturgeon's speech - Summary
We've already heard Nicola Sturgeon's response to George Osborne. But she has just been delivering a more full-length version in a speech to University College London.
Here are the key points.
• Sturgeon said that that an independent Scotland would be better placed to defend the institutions most valued by the No campaign - the NHS and the welfare state - than Westminster.
The very institutions that the No campaign is seeking to use to build support for continued Westminster government - the NHS and the welfare state - are being undermined by Westminster ...
Far from a No vote protecting the institutions that we value, a No vote keeps them at the mercy of Westminster decisions and places them under threat.And it is not just a case - as Labour would have us believe - of crossing our fingers and hoping for a different Westminster government. In truth, there is very little to choose between the different Westminster parties on these issues.Let's not forget it was New Labour that enthusiastically embraced the market in healthcare and the Private Finance Initiative. And it is Labour today that says it will be just as tough - if not tougher - than the Tories on welfare ...
By showing that things can be done differently; by demonstrating that the Westminster way is not the only way - just as we have done with the limited powers the Scottish Parliament has already - I believe an independent Scotland can offer a positive example to those elsewhere in the UK who are also being let down by the status quo - indeed, to all those who yearn for progressive change just as much as we do.
• She said Scottish independence would strengthen the relationship between the "family of nations that make up the British isles".
I also believe that independence will create a healthier relationship between Scotland and the other nations of these islands.
With independence, Scotland will no longer be able to blame 'London' for things that go wrong - as we sometimes do now. Responsibility for our successes as well as our mistakes will rest with us. And the rest of the UK will no longer be able to express concern - albeit unfounded - that Scotland is in some way being subsidised.
• She claimed that Osborne's speech would backfire.
[The No campaign] know that their positions lack credibility but repeat them anyway and then wonder why their campaign is losing ground.
Nothing demonstrates this more starkly than the position on currency outlined this morning by George Osborne - a position that I predict will backfire spectacularly on the No campaign.
It is a panicked reaction to shifting polls. It smacks of bullying and intimidation. And believe me, people in Scotland will not take kindly to being bullied by George Osborne.
But worst of all, it's a bluff and people know it - whatever George Osborne might like to think, we're not daft.
It would be "absurd" for Westminster to reject a currency union, because a currency union would be in its interests, she said.
• She said Scotland clearly could afford to be independent. Only last week the Financial Times said an independent Scotland "could expect to start with healthier state finances than the rest of the UK", she said.
• She said the SNP's case was not "separatist".
Above all, it is important for us to be crystal clear to the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland that our case is not - emphatically not - separatist or insular.
Nor is it in any way, shape or form, driven by antipathy towards or resentment of our neighbours in the rest of the UK.
Instead, it is based on a desire to be responsible, to stand on our own two feet, to make and be accountable for our own decisions - but also to be a good neighbour, making a positive contribution to the world we live in.
• She rejected claims that Scottish independence would leave Westminster with a permanent Tory majority.
While I am on the subject of democracy, let me address one particular myth about Scottish independence - that it would condemn the rest of the UK to one party rule.
In fact, in only two of the 18 general elections since 1945 (October 1964 and February 1974) would the largest party at Westminster have been different if Scotland had been independent and not returned MPs to Westminster. The governments which were elected on these occasions lasted for less than 26 months in total.
That's all from me for today.
I'm off next week (half-term). We probably won't be running a politics blog while I'm away, but we will run a readers' edition instead.
Thanks for the comments.
Liz Cameron, chief executive of the Scottish Chambers of Commerce, has put out a statement saying that George Osborne's clarification that he would block a currency union with an independent Scotland is "extremely useful" to businesses trying to work out what will happen.
Here's an extract.
We know that the preference of the Scottish Government is to continue to use the pound in the event of independence. We have now learned that the UK Government's preference would be to veto a future formal currency union between the remainder of the UK and an independent Scotland. It is therefore clear that in the event of a 'yes' vote for independence, Edinburgh and London would be approaching this issue from diametrically opposed positions. The resulting negotiating process would most likely be complex and lengthy.
Clarification of policy stances from all parties to the independence debate is welcome, though it is important to understand that definitive answers on many issues of application in an independent Scotland would not be available until the conclusion of post-referendum negotiations. Currency remains likely to be one of these issues, though the Chancellor's clarification of the UK Government's stance is extremely useful to businesses as they approach the referendum. His statement does of course raise the importance of the consideration of alternative models for currency in an independent Scotland and scrutiny of how these may impact businesses in the future.
Here are some of the most interesting blogs I've seen on George Osborne's speech.
• Brad MacKay at the Conversation says Osborne's speech is a game changer.
The announcement by the Chancellor, George Osborne, that there would not be monetary union between an independent Scotland and the rump UK is a game changer.
It comes one day after researchers, including myself, working on a major project on the Future of the United Kingdom and Scotland gave a briefing in Brussels on our findings so far. In it David Bell, of Stirling University, and I argued that the major uncertainties facing business are the EU, corporate taxation, income taxation and especially the currency.
In my own research, I have so far conducted 52 in-depth interviews with business leaders in medium and large firms across a variety of sectors. In a clear majority of these interviews, business leaders have indicated that it is uncertainty around the currency that poses the most significant risk for their businesses. Clearly, they are right to worry about the implications of Osborne's announcement, and to wonder what this will actually mean in practice.
• David Torrance at politics.co.uk says George Osborne had taken a calculated risk.
To be fair to the Scottish government, it could be true there's an element of bluff to this. But to dismiss it as purely a campaigning tactic is silly. This is a pretty big, important campaign, so of course there's going to be campaigning tactics.
And if - as the Scottish government says - it's bullying then what's Alex Salmond doing with his repeated suggestion in recent years that he'd renege on UK debt?
• Gary Gibbon on his Channel 4 News blog says the referendum campaign is now getting nasty.
The three main Westminster parties have gone for the kill. Their polling tells them the Achilles heel of the independence cause is the pound in the pocket. They want to convert a worry into a deep fear. The "Yes" camp is saying it's typical "bullying" by the "Westminster" three-headed hydra. But their whole strategy has been to de-risk independence and this must add some risk.
The "No" campaign has been accused by some of lacking a strategy, of being too reactive. It's got a strategy now and a pretty ruthless one. The Prime Minister stood in the Olympic velodrome only last week saying "please stay – we love you" (I paraphrase). Today the Chancellor stood in Edinburgh added the PS: 'if you do go we'll cut you off without a penny.'
• George East-West at All That's Left says that Osborne's speech is a mistake, and that he cannot stop Scotland using the pound.
As George Osborne appears to now rule out a currency union, he is also in danger of losing sight of a potentially huge opportunity. A currency union would create an interesting potential currency alternative to the Euro. This presents a future scenario for other markets would join over time, if the currency union benefits were better than the Euro. George Osborne keeps on highlighting the need to be competitive within a global economy. Today, he has just contradicted himself.
• Andrew Lilico at the Telegraph says that using the pound without a currency union would not be an option for an independent Scotland.
First, it should be understood in no uncertain terms that simply using the pound without a formal currency union with rUK is a non-starter, because (a) it would be totally incompatible with EU rules, for reasons I shall explain, and it is inconceivable that Scotland could be or become a member of the EU whilst maintaining such an arrangement; (b) it would mean that no bank could be located in Scotland, ending three hundred years of Scottish history as a significant finance centre.
Some countries do use the currency of other countries without having a currency union. For example, Montenegro uses the euro. But a country that has no currency by definition has no central bank that issues a currency. A truly tiny country could perhaps use some large international bank as its central bank (e.g. HSBC serves as the central bank for a number of small countries) and rely upon that central bank to have enough of the foreign currency it uses to provide last-resort lending to tiny banks domiciled within it. But the Scottish economy is much too large, and the Scottish banks vastly too large, for such an arrangement to be feasible. HSBC, for example, could not possibly be a sterling last-resort lender for RBS. Its balance sheet isn't remotely large enough.
• Charlie Jeffery at the Conversation says the impact of Osborne's speech is unpredictable.
The Scottish government and the Yes Scotland campaign have been performing a balancing act in recent months. Part of their offer has been the reassurance of continuity around the pound and many other matters; on those matters their assessment is, in effect, that Scotland is – to borrow a phrase – better together with the rest of the UK.
Yet in other areas the Yes camp has been sharpening a message of difference and distinctiveness: on welfare, on childcare and gender equality, on immigration. Here we see a dividing-line strategy which says we are not, on these matters, better together. There is a mixed message here, and perhaps Osborne's statement will push the Yes camp further or more consistently into stressing the distinctiveness of values and policy that independence might bring.
What the UK government and the Better Together campaign will get from Osborne's statement is not fully clear. As Brad Mackay suggests elsewhere Osborne may well feed and deepen the nervousness that Scottish businesses have about currency issues and the transaction costs involved in not being part of a sterling zone. But as John Curtice suggests, ruling out a sterling currency union may have surprisingly little traction on public opinion.
• Derek Bateman on his blog says today's events show that the differences between Labour and the Tories are paper-thin.
I confess to a sneaky sense of pleasure that the true face of Westminster has been revealed unvarnished and unspun so we can see who the Tories' friends are. It has dispelled the notion that this is Scotland against England or against the Tories. It is now explicit that this is Scotland against the whole machinery of British government and all the Unionist parties are in this together, resolutely against Scotland unless we do as they say. It must be salutary for Labour voters to watch Johan Lamont and think what she really represents.
• Douglas Fraser at the BBC says the three Unionist parties have broken their rule about not pre-negotiating independence with the SNP.
• David Clegg at the Daily Record says Alex Salmond now must unveil a plan B.
And here's Alistair Darling, leader of the Better Together campaign, on the Osborne speech.
It is now clear beyond any doubt – the only way to keep the Pound is for Scotland to remain in the UK. People need to know that when they go into a polling station in September they will be voting either to keep the Pound or ditch the Pound. A vote to leave the UK is a vote to lose the Pound.
Alex Salmond has no plan for currency in an independent Scotland. The SNP wanted to turn the pound into the Eurozone but understandably the rest of the UK have said they don't think this is a good idea. The SNP Government have ruled out using the pound without agreement in the way Panama uses the dollar. So what money will Scotland use?
What we need now from the SNP isn't so much a Plan B but a Plan A. Now that using the Pound is off the table, would we be rushing to join the Euro or set up an unproven separate currency?
Alex Salmond should stop making reckless threats about defaulting on debt that would put jobs and businesses in Scotland at risk. People know that if you don't pay your debts your credit rating is shot and that means everything is more expensive.
Here's Andrew Tyrie, the Conservative chair of the Commons Treasury committee, on George Osborne's speech.
The creation of a currency union would not be a decision only for Scotland, but for the whole of the UK.
I've felt for some time that both the UK and Scottish Governments should recognise reality and rule out a formal currency union.
Today, all three major parties in Westminster have done just that. They are right to do so.
In the light of the eurozone experience, it would be particularly hazardous to attempt it now, carrying risks for economic and financial stability on both sides of the border.
Scotland would have other options open to it. It could create its own currency - whether pegged or free floating; it could create a currency board or it could join the euro. Each would have benefits and drawbacks.
A decision among these options now needs to be made by the 'yes' campaign. In that way, the Scottish electorate can make an informed choice on whether to stay in the UK.
Lunchtime summary - including full details of George Osborne's speech, and the reaction to it
I'm dividing the summary into two sections today - one devoted to George Osborne's speech, and another devoted to the rest of the morning's political news.
Osborne's speech is worth gutting in some detail because it may be one of those rare ones that really does shift opinion. We won't know, of course, until we see what happens to the polls over the next few weeks. (Even then, if the polls do move, we won't know for certain why - although it would be fair to assume that an intervention like Osborne's could have had an impact.)
George Osborne's speech
• All three main UK parties have explicitly ruled out agreeing a currency union with an independent Scotland in the event of Scotland voting for independence in the referendum in September. This is a highly significant moment in the campaign because the SNP's vision for independence if firmly based upon Scotland having such a union with the rest of the UK (rUK in the jargon). The SNP must now either try to persuade voters that rUK is bluffing (the tactic it has been deploying this morning), or firm up alternative proposals. Osborne made the declaration in a speech in Edinburgh.
I could not as Chancellor recommend that we could share the pound with an independent Scotland.
The evidence shows it wouldn't work. It would cost jobs and cost money. It wouldn't provide economic security for Scotland or for the rest of the UK.
Danny Alexander, the Lib Dem chief secretary to the Treasury, made a similar statement this morning. (See 10.15am.) And Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor, has also ruled out a currency union in an interview broadcast on the BBC about an hour ago. (See 1.32pm.)
• Sir Nicholas Macpherson, the Treasury permanent secretary, has taken the unusual step of signing and releasing a public letter to George Osborne saying that he would "advise strongly against a currency union as currently advocated". While there is nothing remarkable about civil servants backing government policy - in fact, it is their job - it is not normal for them to make such a high-profile intervention on a partisan issue. MacPherson's letter summarised the arguments set out in a 76-page analysis paper explaining the Treasury's objections to a currency union. Osborne used the arguments in his speech.
• Osborne said the SNP's threat to refuse to pay Scotland's share of the UK's national debate in the event of an independent Scotland not being offered a currency union was implausible. Alex Salmond knew that he could not take that step because the consequences for Scotland would be disastrous, Osborne said.
International lenders would look at Scotland and see a fledgling country whose only credit history was one gigantic default.
And they would demand a punitively high interest rate as a result.
That would be crippling for every Scottish household with a mortgage or personal loan, for every Scottish business with credit, for the public finances and therefore for public services and for taxpayers, and for the whole economy.
• Osborne said that, even if Scotland did honour its debts, the Scots would have to pay higher interest rates adding an extra £1,700 a year to the cost of an average mortgage if they voted for independence. The Treasury set out the reasons in its analysis.
An independent Scottish state would find it more expensive to borrow in financial markets as it would have: a less liquid debt market; a lack of an institutional track record and institutional uncertainty; higher economic and fiscal volatility; a larger future potential debt burden; a larger financial services sector, with larger contingent liabilities as a share of GDP; and reduced monetary policy flexibility to respond to external shocks. The National Institute of Economic and Social Research have estimated that in a sterling currency union the government of an independent Scottish state would pay an interest rate premium of between 0.72 and 1.65 per cent, relative to the price of UK Government funding.
• Osborne said he could not recommend a banking union with an independent Scotland because, with Scottish banking assets worth 12 times Scottish GDP, the potential cost of bailing out Scotland could be ruinous.
At heart this banking union would involve putting UK taxpayers on the line for banks in a foreign country.
Asking them to underwrite a Scottish Government guarantee on deposits held in Scottish Banks.
Asking to put their money at risk whenever Scottish authorities extend emergency support to Scottish banks.
And with little prospect of any benefit flowing in the other direction – for Scotland could only make a limited contribution to supporting a big English bank.
It is very difficult to see how after a 'Yes' vote, any UK politician could propose such an asymmetrical arrangement.
• He accused the SNP of over-estimating how much revenue they would gain from North Sea oil.
In the last Autumn Statement for example the Office for Budget Responsibility cut its forecast for North Sea revenues by almost £4bn over the next three years.
But instead of needing to cut spending, the Scottish Government saw its budget rise by more than £300m.
In its analysis paper, the Treasury said it was "inconceivable" that the Scottish government would be able to "adjust its fiscal position" (ie, cut spending or raise taxes) quickly enough to enter a currency union in 2016.
• Osborne said an independent Scotland would be highly vulnerable to a cut in the world oil price.
Under independence, if the Scottish Government did not have the flexibility to cut interest rates – and lacked the fiscal risk sharing it currently has – it would have to respond to a fall in oil revenues by cutting public spending dramatically or raising taxes hugely in response.
The Treasury analysis published today shows that for each 20 dollar fall in the oil price, an independent Scotland would lose 11,000 jobs, whereas if it remained part of the UK it wouldn't lose any.
To put this in context, between 2008 and 2009 the global oil price fell by over 60 dollars.
• He said the suggestion in the Scottish government's white paper that a currency union might not be permanent meant it would be doomed to fail.
If currency unions are to succeed then the markets must believe they are built to last.
Look at the massive damage to confidence and stability in 2012 when there was doubt about whether Greece would remain in the euro – despite the protestations of everlasting currency union by all involved ...
The markets would try to break a Sterling currency union – knowing that, unlike with Greece, the Scottish Government were actively stressing how temporary the arrangements were.
Just look at what happened to the last two nations who tried to form a currency union following separation – Slovakia and the Czech Republic.
Their union fell apart after only thirty three days as capital flowed from one to the other in pursuit of the safe haven.
• Osborne rejected SNP claims that the pound was an "asset" to be shared between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK.
The Scottish government say "it's as much Scotland's pound as the rest of the UK's".
They are like an angry party to a messy divorce.
But the pound isn't an asset to be divided up between the two countries after break-up as if it were a CD collection.
The value of the pound doesn't lie in the paper and ink that's used to print it.
The value of the pound lies in the entire monetary system underpinning it.
In its analysis, the Treasury said there was "no rule or principle in international law" saying the continuing UK would have to share its currency with an independent Scotland.
• Alex Salmond has accused Osborne and his Unionist allies of bluffing and and claimed that their attempt to "intimidate" Scottish voters will backfire. (See 1.49am.)
Other news
• David Cameron has convened a special cabinet committee on flooding for the first time, with ministers being given an update on the extent of power and transport disruption caused by overnight storms.
• Two former Labour home secretaries, Alan Johnson and Charles Clarke, have called for elected police and crime commissioners to be abolished describing them as "an unhappy and unsatisfactory interlude in the history of British policing".
• Nick Clegg has reaffirmed his insistence that Lord Rennard must apologise for his behaviour towards women if he wants to be readmitted to the Lib Dems.
• Two Labour pressure groups backed by Lord Sainsbury have been fined for accepting donations from him when he was not on the electoral register.
Alex Salmond's response to George Osborne
And Alex Salmond, Scotland's first minister, has now responded to the George Osborne speech. Here are the main points.
• Salmond said that Osborne and his Unionist allies were bluffing and that their attempt to "intimidate" Scottish voters would backfire.
People in Scotland will not be fooled by the bluff, bluster and posturing of Osborne, Ed Balls and Danny Alexander.
This is a concerted bid by a Tory-led Westminster establishment to bully and intimidate - but their efforts to claim ownership of sterling will backfire spectacularly in terms of reaction from the people of Scotland, who know that the pound is as much theirs as it is George Osborne's.
• Salmond said that Unionist parties would, in reality, have to agree to a currency union because it would "overwhelmingly" be in the interests of the rest of the UK.
The reality is that a formal currency union with a shared sterling area is overwhelmingly in the rest of the UK's economic interests following a Yes vote, and the stance of any UK government will be very different the day after a Yes vote to the campaign rhetoric we are hearing now.
To do otherwise would involve a prospective Westminster chancellor of any party standing on a platform which was not only vastly at odds with majority public opinion across Scotland and the rest of the UK, but would seriously damage the economy of the rest of the UK as it would cost their own businesses hundreds of millions of pounds a year, blow a massive hole in their balance of payments and it would leave them having to pick up the entirety of UK debt.
• He reiterated the suggestion that failure to agree a currency union could lead to an independent Scotland not paying its share of UK debt.
All the debt accrued up to the point of independence belongs legally to the Treasury, as they confirmed last month - and Scotland can't default on debt that's not legally ours.
All the debt accrued up to the point of independence belongs legally to the Treasury, as they confirmed last month - and Scotland can't default on debt that's not legally ours.
However, we've always taken the fair and reasonable position that Scotland should meet a fair share of the costs of that debt. But assets and liabilities go hand in hand, and - contrary to the assertions today, sterling and the Bank of England are clearly shared UK assets.
• He said that Osborne had a record of making false claims in relation to Scotland.
This is not the first time George Osborne has made spurious claims regarding the independence debate. Two years ago he claimed the prospect of the referendum would damage investment in Scotland, claims which have been utterly blown apart by our great success in attracting inward investment, and today the Chancellor was forced to acknowledge the success of the Scottish economy.
• He said Osborne's speech showed that the No campaign "realise they are losing the arguments on the ground as they see the polls narrowing, and support for a Yes vote growing".
Ed Balls' interview on a currency union - Summary
Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor, has now set out his opposition to a currency union. He did so in a pooled interview for broadcasters. Here are the main points.
• Ed Balls said Labour would not agree to a currency union with an independent Scotland.
Alex Salmond is saying to people that you can have independence and keep the pound and the Bank of England. That is not going to happen. It would be bad for Scotland, it would place an unacceptable burden on the UK taxpayer, it would repeat the mistakes of the euro area. In fact worse, you'd be trying to negotiate a monetary union as Scotland is pulling away from the UK. It won't happen, I wouldn't recommend it. Scotland will not keep the pound if Scotland chooses independence ...
The idea that Scotland could negotiate an acceptable monetary union with the rest of the UK while it's trying to move away, weakening the banking union, moving away from fiscal union, that would be catastrophic for interest rates, for taxes and for economic stability for Scotland and for the rest of the UK. I don't think there's any prospect of any negotiation being successful, that's why we can say now, unequivocally, that is not an agreement we will reach. Labour will not negotiate a continued sharing of the pound and the Bank of England with an independent Scotland in the future.
• He accused Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon of lying about a currency union.
I don't think that Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon are being honest with the Scottish people when they say Scotland can keep the pound because they must know it is not true. The idea that Scotland could keep the pound and the Bank of England and be subsidised and supported by the UK taxpayer having chosen independence is not going to happen.
• He said Salmond could not expect to be seen as a "credible" international figure if he threatened to renege on Scotland's share of the UK's debt.
• He said today's Treasury analysis on the dangers posed by a currency union echoed some of the arguments used by the Treasury when it ruled out Britain joining the single currency. (Balls was Gordon Brown's most senior adviser at the time, and played a hugely influential role in determining Treasury policy at the time.)
The Labour Treasury in 2003 published an assessment which said Britain shouldn't join the single currency, and history has proved that judgement to be right. Drawing upon that analysis the Treasury, 10 years on, is saying the same arguments apply to Scotland and that is correct.
• He rejected claims that the Unionist parties were "bullying" the Scots.
I want to continue with this very successful union we've had for hundreds of years and more than that, I want the next Labour government to make it a fairer union for the future. It is the SNP who have put independence and exit for Scotland on the agenda.
On the Daily Politics Nicola Sturgeon cited an article in the Scotsman today by Sir James Mirrlees, the Nobel Prize-winning economist, which says that a currency union between Scotland and the rest of the UK would be "the most logical option".
Mirrlees was a member of the Scottish government's fiscal commission working group. It produced a report on the macroeconomic options for an independent Scotland in February last year which recommended a currency union.
In his Scotsman article, Mirrlees also says that having a Scottish pound would be an option.
Even if Scotland were instead to follow Hong Kong's example and have a Scottish pound which a Scottish currency board keeps at parity with sterling, the interest rate would essentially be imposed on Scotland by world markets. Hong Kong exercises considerable autonomy in its fiscal and macro-economic policies. Scotland could expect to be able to enjoy comparable or greater autonomy.
Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland's deputy first minister, is on the Daily Politics now. Andrew Neil is trying repeatedly to get her to say what the SNP would do if the rest of the UK did not agree to a currency union. But she is sticking to the line that a currency union would be in the interests of both countries.
Plaid Cymru, the Welsh nationalist party, has criticised George Osborne's speech. This is from Jonathan Edwards, its Treasury spokesman.
Chancellor Osborne's comment show that 'Project Fear' has gone into over-drive having finally realised that a victory for the Yes camp is a very real possibility.
Mr Osborne knows full well that the currency union benefits from Scotland's membership and is resorting to desperate tactics in an attempt to scare Scots into voting for the status quo.
Just as the Welsh first minister's embarrassing intervention proved when he threatened to veto a currency union - something he has no power over whatsoever, every incident of sabre-rattling from Better Together is a gift to the Yes campaign.
Here's a round-up of some of the most interesting Twitter reaction to George Osborne's speech.
From the pro-independence Wings over Scotland
From the pro-independence National Collective
From Andrew Wilson, a former SNP MSP
From Jim Murphy, the Labour former Scottish secretary
He's talking about George Osborne and Ed Balls.
From Anas Sarwar, Labour's deputy leader in Scotland
From Alan Roden, political editor of the Scottish Daily Mail
From Tom Gordon, the Sunday Herald Scottish political editor
From Chris Deerin
From Gideon Rachman, the Financial Time columnist
From the Spectator's Alex Massie
From Channel 4 News's Faisal Islam
From the historian Tom Holland
From Euan McColm
From Ian Bell
Nicola Sturgeon's interview - Summary
Here are the main points from Nicola Sturgeon's interview on Sky News.
• Sturgeon said that George Osborne's declaration that he would block a currency union was just "campaign rhetoric".
What we are hearing today from the chancellor are campaign tactics. [Osborne] doesn't want Scotland to vote for independence. He is perfectly entitled to argue the case. But I thought the former first minister of Scotland, the former Labour first minister, Henry McLeish, who's a No supporter, he put it quite well this morning when he said the people of Scotland should not be fooled by what are campaign tactics.
And here's what McLeish actually said.
This is entirely political and of course consistent with the unionist campaign. This is negative, it is about spreading fears and scare stories.
What we require from the unionist parties is a bit of statesmanship and quite frankly their behaviour so far falls well short of that.
• Sturgeon said that a currency union would be in Scotland's interest, and also in the interests of the the rest of the UK.
England exports around about £60bn's worth of good into Scotland every year. They export more into Scotland than they do to India, China, Brazil, South Africa put together. Secondly, the oil and gas exports that come from the North Sea help greatly with the UK's balance of payments. It you took them away, it would blow a great hole in the balance of payments, and increase the trade deficit of the UK.
• She reiterated the SNP's threat that an independent Scotland could refuse to pay its share of UK debt in the event of the rest of the UK not agreeing to a currency union.
And, of course, if we don't have a shared currency, if there isn't an acceptance that if Scotland votes democratically for independence then we have a sensible negotiation around assets and liabilities, then the UK would end up shouldering the entirety of UK debt.
• She said that Sir Mervyn King, the former Bank of England governor, told Alex Salmond that what the Treasury says now is not the same as what it would say in the event of a Yes vote.
As the former governor of the Bank of England, Sir Mervyn King, said to the first minister, what the Treasury says now, in the heat of the campaign, will be very different to what they say after a democratic vote for independence, when common sense will trump the campaign rhetoric.
This conversation happened a couple of years ago, Salmond revealed recently.
• She said that polls showed, if Scotland did vote for independence, the people of England would want a currency union. (Here is one recent poll, suggesting that 71% of people in England, Wales and Northern Ireland would favour a currency union.)
• She said that Mark Carney, the current governor of the Bank of England, said that he could make a currency union work in his recent "sensible and measured speech" in Edinburgh.
Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland's deputy first minister, is on Sky News now responding to George Osborne.
In a nutshell, she says he's bluffing - and that the rest of the UK would end up accepting a currency union because it would be in its interests.
I will post her quotes shortly.
Danny Alexander, the Lib Dem chief secretary to the Treasury, has now put out a statement confirming that the Lib Dems are also opposed to a currency union with an independent Scotland.
The full text is on the Treasury website.
Here's an excerpt.
All of the currency options for an independent Scotland are riskier than the current arrangements, but a currency union carries particular risks, especially when the Scottish government says it might only be a temporary arrangement, leaving it at huge risks from market speculation.
A currency union would leave the rest of the UK highly exposed to fiscal and financial risks from a separate Scotland.
As a Scot and as Chief Secretary to the UK Treasury, on the basis of this analysis, I couldn't recommend a currency union to the people of Scotland and my party couldn't agree to such a proposition for the rest of the UK.
The Scottish government continue to pretend that an independent Scotland could continue to share the pound. It couldn't, without agreement. And because a currency wouldn't work for anyone, it simply isn't going to happen. The Scottish government now need to work out what their alternative currency proposal is and set it out openly.
This isn't bluff, or bullying, it's a statement of fact. The Scottish government's claims that an independent Scotland could or should be able to share the pound are pure fiction. When we vote in September, no one in Scotland should vote for independence in the belief that we could keep the pound.
Treasury permanent secretary on SNP's threat not to pay its share of UK debt
And here is another extract from Sir Nick Macpherson's letter. It explains why he does not think the SNP threat to renege on its share of UK debt, in the event of the rest of the UK refusing a currency union, is not credible.
If you follow Treasury advice and this week rule out a currency union in the event of Scottish independence, you can expect the Scottish Government to threaten not to take on its share of the United Kingdom's debt. I do not believe this is a credible threat. First, the sooner an independent Scotland established economic credibility, the better it would be for its economic performance. An extensive wrangle about its share of the debt would increase uncertainty and hence its funding costs. Secondly, the debt is one of a number of issues which would have to be settled post independence, where the new Scottish state would require the cooperation of the international community including the continuing UK.
And here is what MacPherson says about the impact of the threat on UK borrowing costs.
As for the impact of the threat, much will depend on the markets' assessment of the probability of a pro independence vote and the likelihood of the Scottish Government seeing the threat through. In the short run, any uptick in gilt yields is likely to be small. And in the worst case scenario, it is more than likely that the increase in funding costs, which the continuing UK would face, would be smaller than that which would result from an ill thought out currency union with Scotland.
Treasury permanent secretary on why currency union is a bad idea
Here is an extract from the letter from Sir Nicholas Macpherson, the permanent secretary at the Treasury, to George Osborne about a currency union. Macpherson explains why he thinks a currency union would be a bad ida.
I would advise strongly against a currency union as currently advocated, if Scotland were to vote for independence. Why?
First, the Scottish Government is still leaving the option open of moving to a different currency option in the longer term. Successful currency unions are based on the near universal belief that they are irreversible. Imagine what would have happened to Greece two years ago if they had said they were contemplating reverting to the Drachma.
Secondly, Scotland's banking sector is far too big in relation to its national income, which means that there is a very real risk that the continuing UK would end up bearing most of the liquidity and solvency risk which it creates.
Thirdly, there is the problem of asymmetry. The continuing UK would be at risk of providing taxpayer support to the Scottish financial sector and sovereign. An independent Scottish state would not face the same risk as it is inconceivable that a small economy could bail-out an economy nearly ten times its size. This asymmetry could only cause continuing UK problems unless Scotland is prepared to cede substantially more sovereignty on monetary and fiscal matters than any advocates of independence are currently contemplating.
Finally, Treasury analysis suggests that fiscal policy in Scotland and the rest of UK would become increasingly misaligned in the medium term. Of course, if the Scottish Government had demonstrated a strong commitment to a rigorous fiscal policy in recent months, it might be possible to discount this. But recent spending and tax commitments by the Scottish Government point in the opposite direction, as do their persistently optimistic projections of North Sea revenues, which are at odds not just with the Treasury but with the Office of Budget Responsibility and other credible independent forecasters.
There is a substantive point here. If the dashing of Scottish expectations were perpetually blamed on continuing UK intransigence within the currency union, relations between the nations of these islands would deteriorate, putting intolerable pressure on the currency union.
Here is the full text of George Osborne's speech.
Here is the Treasury's 78-page assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of a currency union (pdf).
And here is the letter from Sir Nicholas Macpherson, the permanent secretary at the Treasury, to Osborne about the issue (pdf).
Q: If Scotland votes for independent, won't the rest of the UK have to act in its own self-interest?
Osborne says he does not want to get into what the negotiations would be like. He hopes Scotland stays.
But just asserting in advance that the rest of the UK would accept a currency union is false claim.
He says he has been making this clear.
It is for the people of Scotland to make their own decision.
But he wants them do so in full knowledge of the facts.
And that's it. The Q&A is over.
I will be posting a summary and reaction shortly.
Q: [From John Curtice, the academic] Can we look forward to similar clarity on other issues, like whether Scotland could share the BBC, or the rest of the UK's stance on Scotland joining the EU?
Osborne says he does not want to get into a pre-negotiation.
But the SNP have asserted that the rest of the UK would accept a currency union. That is just not the case, he says.
This should bring clarity to the debate, he says.
Scottish voters should make their own decision. But they should do so on the basis of correct information.
Osborne says Alex Salmond has a tendency not to welcome any opinion he does not share.
That is something for the Scottish people to see through, he says.
He says he delivered his speech today to bring uncertainty to an end.
Q: What about Scotland using the pound without a currency union?
This is sterlingisation, Osborne says. It is what Panama and Montenegro does. Countries like this have no control at all over interest rates. The SNP's own fiscal commission said this was not a viable option.
Q: Isn't there a danger your message could backfire, because it looks as if you are threatening Scotland?
Osborne says people need to know the facts.
Today three parties are all saying that what the SNP claim is not the case.
Q: Are you not to blame for encouraging business uncertainty?
Osborne says it is not him advocating the break up of the UK. He wants Scotland to stay in the UK. So he is not the one posing the economic risk.
What is striking about the SNP's response is that they do not try and engage with the economic arguments.
They are now issuing this "reckless threat" about not honouring Scotland's debt. But Alex Salmond knows his economics. He knows that it would be very damaging for Scotland to do that. He is issuing this threat because he has got nothing else to say.
Osborne is now taking questions.
There is a live feed on the BBC website.
He says the people of Scotland should know the full facts.
Q: Will you outline the costs of a currency union?
Osborne says they are set out in the Treasury document today. Any gains from the elimination of transaction costs are relatively small, he says. Those gains are outweighed by the risks.
Osborne says there is an alternative future.
It is of a strong Scotland in an United Kingdom.
That is worth fighting for, he says.
Osborne says, on the basis of the official advice he has received, which is that they would not recommend a currency union, it is clear to him that he could not recommend sharing the pound with an independent Scotland.
It would not work, he says.
And he does not think any other chancellor would come to a different view.
The SNP say an independent Scotland would be able to share the pound.
That is not going to happen, he says. The people would not accept it.
Osborne says the people of Scotland are being asked to accept that everything will change, and that nothing will change, if they vote for independence. That does not add up.
Osborne says the fourth requirement would be for the currency union to be permanent.
If currency unions are to last, the markets must know they will endure.
But the SNP's is not committed to a long-term currency union. Their white paper said that a currency union would be temporary arrangement, and that it could be ditched.
This makes it unsustainable.
Imagine what would have happened if Greece had said its membership of the euro was temporary. The drachma would have come back the next day.
Osborne says that when the Czech Republic and Slovakia tried to form a currency union, it only lasted 33 days, because capital fled from one country to another.
Osborne says the third condition would be monetary union, and an agreed exchange rate policy.
He says a fall in oil prices would have a big impact on Scotland.
As part of the UK, Scotland is insulated from that.
But, if it were independent, and could not cut interest rates, it would have to respond to a fall in interest rates by cutting spending or raising taxes.
A fall in the oil price could lead to big job losses, he says.
If this were to happen, there would be pressure for Scotland to give up the pound.
Osborne says a currency union would also require fiscal cooperation.
There would have to be a shared agreement on spending and taxation.
But there would be no Scottish MPs in parliament having a say on the fiscal pact, and its impact on Scotland.
And MPs from the rest of the UK would not want Scotland having a say on their taxes.
Osborne says Alex Salmond has said that a fiscal union would not have to cover tax rates.
But that shows his idea of a fiscal union is a million miles form that envisaged by Mark Carney.
Osborne says the Treasury is today publishing an analysis highlighting the problems there would be establishing a currency union with an independent Scotland.
It highlights four conditons for a successful currency union, he says.
First, there would have to be a banking union.
Scottish banking assets are worth 12 times its GDP. Without guarantees, those banks would have to leave.
Scotland alone would not be able to bail out its banks.
And it would not be able to fund a deposit guarantee scheme, he says.
It would also be an essential demand for the rest of the UK. That's because the rest of the UK would be tying itself to a country with a huge financial sector, and a huge potential to damage it.
Osborne asks how he could recommend a banking union to the rest of the UK. After all, the government has fought to keep the UK out of the European banking union.
A banking union would put the rest of the UK on the line.
And there would be few benefits for the rest of the UK. That's because an independent Scotland would not be able to make much of a contribution to bailing out the rest of the UK.
So there would be nothing in it for the rest of the UK.
Osborne says that an independent Scotland would have to pay more to borrow.
Experts think it would have to pay between 72 and 165 basis points more in interest, he says.
That would add £1,700 a year to the average Scottish mortgage, he says.
Osborne says the SNP have hinted that an independent Scotland could refuse to pay its share of UK debt if not allowed to use the pound.
But people would not want to lend to a country that does not honour its debts, he says. So the threat is an empty one.
Osborne says the SNP say a currency union would be in the rest of the UK's interests.
There would be some advantages to a currency union, Osborne says, because of the large volume of trade the rest of the UK does with Scotland.
But it trades with Europe and America too. And no one is suggesting we should join the euro or the dollar.
Osborne says the SNP say the pound belongs to Scotland too.
But it is not like a CD collection that can be split up when a couple separate.
The currency is underpinned by a whole financial system.
There is no legal reason why the rest of the UK would have to share the pound.
When the SNP say the pound is theirs, do they think the rest of the UK would agree to guarantee their spending?
This is absurd, Osborne says.
If Scotland walks away from the UK, it would be walking away from the pound.
Osborne says no contribution was probably more important than that from Mark Carney, a Canadian working at the Bank of England offering independent advice.
Carney says that a currency union posed real risks if it was not set up properly, Osborne says.
And, in the face of the questions posed by Carney, what have the SNP said? They have just asserted that a currency union is a common sense position.
Osborne says the status quo is a common sense position.
The SNP have not tried to answer the questions Carney posed.
They have just responded with unfounded assertions and wild threats.
Osborne says the currency issues highlights the risk to the Scottish economy.
Last year he said it was unlikely the rest of the UK would want to share a currency union with an independent Scotland, he says.
Today he is publishing further advice on this. And he is taking the exceptional step of publishing a letter he has had on this from the Treasury permanent secretary.
Osborne says many experts have spoken out about the problems of a currency union.
Recently the head of BP said the unanswered questions about the currency could put investment at risk.
And now the previous two chancellor, and the shadow chancellor, and the chief secretary to the Treasury have raised the same concerns as he has.
Osborne says the UK works.
The UK works. In good times, and also in bad.
Together we have faced the worst economic and financial crisis since the Great Depression.
Government debt sky-rocketed, hundreds of thousands of people lost their jobs, banks were bailed out, and as a nation we were made poorer.
But we avoided the economic collapse other nations around us in Europe faced. Because together, we had the strength to confront our problems and overcome them.
Reducing our deficit, cleaning up our financial system, and working through a long term economic plan for the country.
He says the economy is growing, especially in Scotland.
The UK economy is growing faster than any other advanced economy in Europe.
And within the UK, Scotland is growing faster than the rest.
We've had six consecutive quarters of Scottish growth.
Growth not just in services, but in manufacturing and construction too.
Over a hundred thousand new jobs have been created in Scotland in the last four years.
Sixty five thousand fewer people unemployed compared to 2010
Today Scotland is one of the most economically successful parts of the UK.
George Osborne's speech on Scotland
George Osborne is speaking in Edinburgh now.
A stable currency is the bedrock of the economy, he says.
He says he does not have a vote on 18 September. But he knows where he stands.
The pound is one of the oldest and most successful currencies in the world.
I want Scotland to keep the pound and the economic security that it brings.
And I hope passionately that the people of Scotland - who make such an important contribution to life on these islands - choose to stay within our family of nations here in the United Kingdom.
Nick Clegg's LBC phone-in
Nick Clegg is hosting his LBC phone-in.
The first caller asked if Clegg agreed that some of the aid budget should be diverted to help victims of the floods.
Clegg said he didn't. The government could help the flood victims, as well as honouring its international aid obligations too, he said.
Blair Jenkins, the chief executive of the pro-independence Yes Scotland campaign, told BBC Radio Scotland this morning that ruling out a currency union was a "very extreme position being taken for the purposes of negotiation" by the pro-Union parties.
A currency union would be the best choice for an independent Scotland and for the rest of the UK, he said.
It would be so clearly to the detriment of the rest of the UK to impose the additional costs, currency transactions, currency conversion, to threaten growth, to threaten jobs in that way.
To go against what we know is the wishes of the majority of people in England, that Scotland should continue to use the pound after we vote Yes in September, would be ludicrous.
In negotiations it is not unusual for one side to adopt a "good cop, bad cop" routine. And this seems to be what the Conservative party is doing in relation to Scottish independence. Last Friday David Cameron delivered an eloquent, but rather gushing, speech expressing his "love" for the United Kingdom, and his desire for Scotland to remain part of it. He was making a positive appeal to Scottish voters. Less than a week later, Downing Street is adopting a rather different tone. George Osborne has been sent to Edinburgh wearing the knuckle dusters to issue a threat: if Scotland votes for independence, it won't be allowed to keep the pound.
What is even more significant, as my colleague Nicholas Watt first reported, Labour and the Liberal Democrats are going to come out after Osborne and deliver exactly the same message.
Given the importance of the currency to the debate on Scottish independence, this is the most significant moment in the independence debate since the publication of the Scottish government's white paper.
The SNP are accusing the three main UK parties of "bullying" Scotland. This is what Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland's deputy first minister, said yesterday.
This is a panic move which will backfire spectacularly. People won't take kindly to the Westminster establishment ganging up to try and bully Scotland in the decision that we are being asked to take on the referendum.
It is hard to deny that she has got a point. But we don't know yet whether or not Osborne's move will backfire in the way she clearly hopes it will. And accusing Osborne of "bullying" does not absolve the SNP of the need to find a credible response to what the three Unionist parties are saying. Today we might get a clearer idea of how they are going to respond.
Here is some background reading.
• Nicholas Watt and Severin Carrell's preview story about Osborne's speech.
• An analysis by David Torrance explaining why today's speech is so significant.
• An assessment by Larry Elliott of the five options now available to the SNP.
I will be covering the speech, and the reaction to it, in detail.
Here is the full agenda.
9am: Nick Clegg hosts his Call Clegg LBC phone-in.
9am: Elizabeth Truss, the education minister, gives a speech on childcare.
9.30am: George Osborne delivers his speech on independence in Edinburgh.
11am: David Cameron chairs the new cabinet committee on recovery from the floods.
11am: The Electoral Commission releases quarterly details of party loans and donations.
1pm: Ed Davey, the energy secretary, gives a speech on climate change. As Rowena Mason reports, Davey will say that Britain's climate change policy is under threat from a "diabolical cocktail" of nimbyism, denial of science and fear of Europe from politicians on the right.
I plan to focus today on the Osborne speech and reaction to it. But, as usual, I will also be flagging up any breaking political news, posting summaries with a round-up of all the day's developments, and highlighting the most interesting political articles on the web.
If you want to follow me on Twitter, I'm on @AndrewSparrow.


text:
Marcus Ferrar writes easily readable history about Germany, Eastern Europe, World War II, the Holocaust, Communism and the transition to democracy and market economies, based on real stories of people living through dramatic events.
As an award-winning communication consultant, he works with businesses to help formulate strategies and communicate them effectively.
As a former foreign correspondent Marcus Ferrar has lived in six European countries, in East and West. read more
FORTHCOMING Title:
From classical times and the exploits of the legendary Spartacus, men and women have fought for their freedom.
Read more here
I live in Oxford, UK.
I'm Chairman of the Friends of Summertown Library in Oxford.
My agent is Lorella Belli
THE BUDAPEST HOUSE: A Life Rediscovered
Crux Publishing, London, 2013
"Marcus Ferrar takes us on a poignant but unsentimental journey through Hungary's darkest hours and their aftermath – one that still resonates through the decades. Ferrar masterfully recounts moving personal stories against their wider historical backdrop and vividly evokes Budapest's haunted past."
Adam LeBor, correspondent at The Economist
and author of The Budapest Protocol
A Hungarian traumatised by the loss of half her family in
Auschwitz returns to Budapest to retrace her roots. She discovers a dramatic personal history that enables her eventually to shed the burden of her past and move forward to a new life.
This is a true story of human beings caught up in the maelstrom of 20th century history – Nazis genocide, Cold War, dictatorship, and the aftermath of Communism. Told with great sympathy and warmth, this well researched book brings history to life by recounting the experiences of ordinary men and women confronted with daunting challenges.
To learn more visit The Budapest House website
A FOOT IN BOTH CAMPS: A German Past For Better And For Worse
LBLA Digital, London, 2012
An Anglo-German grows up torn between British wartime heroes and kindly German relatives, resolving his conflict of loyalty only in the ruins of Dresden.
"This lucidly-written book bridges the gap between Britain and Germany with scrupulous analysis and humane sympathy. It is an elegantly concise view of Anglo-German history set in the realities of personal and family existence." – Jim Reed, Emeritus Professor of German, University of Oxford.
"In this engaging book, Marcus Ferrar combines a personal memoir with a well-informed grasp of the history of both countries and their attitudes towards each other over the past century." – Iain R. Smith, Emeritus Reader in History, University of Warwick.
"A moving, well-written read." – Robert Stewart, University of Missouri-Kansas City.
Readers' comments: "… unputdownable … solid research and a very lucid presentation … a penetrating insight into what makes modern Germany tick … highly recommended … once you start this book, you will be unable to put it down."
Read an extract
SLOVENIA 1945: Memories of Death and Survival after World War II
This book by John Corsellis & Marcus Ferrar was chosen as Book of the Year in 2005 by John Bayley, critic and widower of Iris Murdoch, in the Times Literary Supplement.
First published by I.B. Tauris, London, 2005
Slovene version by Mladinska Knjiga, Ljubljana, 2006
Italian version by Libreria Editrice Goriziana, 2008
"It is right … that we too remember the tragedy which befell the Slovene people."
British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw.
"Presents us with a range of individuals as vividly seen and as sharply characterised as the multifarious inhabitants of War and Peace or A Dance to the Music of Time."
– John Bayley more reviews

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Join the SaleHoo affiliate program and earn money promoting SaleHoo from your website, newsletter list or blog. You don't need to do any selling... you just send visitors to our site, and earn commissions when they buy something! Easy as that!
What you get when you join:
So sign up today! Just fill in the friendly form below, and you'll get instant access to the resources area.
The full text of the SaleHoo Affiliate Agreement can be found below. But here's the "good parts" version:
Full terms of conditions can be found at our affiliates terms and conditions page.


text:
White & Case is one of the largest global law firms present in Poland. We combine our knowledge of Polish law and thorough understanding of the Polish economy with the global resources of our Firm.
The Firm opened its office in Poland in 1991. Since that time, we have acted as counsel to numerous clients—Polish companies, multinationals, public administration and international institutions—advising them in choosing the optimum legal solutions to meet their goals. We provide a full scope of legal advisory services, offering comprehensive support for all business matters, including transactions and litigation, as well as legal assistance in day-to-day company operations.
Through the extensive network of White & Case offices worldwide, with the continuous collaboration of lawyers from various countries, we are able to assist in the most complicated cross-border transactions and international litigation. We can offer our clients services in connection with both their investment plans in Poland and expansion plans to other markets, in particular, the Central and Eastern European markets.
Our main practice areas are banking & finance, capital markets, corporate, mergers & acquisitions, privatization, litigation & arbitration, private equity/venture capital, real estate, energy & project financing, financial restructuring & insolvency, white collar crime & compliance, insurance and tax. Our clients include the biggest publicly held and private companies, financial institutions, foreign investors, government agencies, and also state-owned companies involved in complicated financial transactions, tax issues, disputes and capital market transactions.
Our lawyers are our most important asset. They were trained in the best schools around the world. They are licensed to practice law not only in Poland, but also in other countries of the European Union and in the United States. All of our professional staff is bilingual (Polish and English), while some of our lawyers are also fluent in French, German, Russian, Spanish and Italian.
As part of an integrated team of legal professionals that spans 26 countries, we bring global breadth and local depth to bear on our clients' most exciting opportunities and difficult challenges.


text:
Latest News
January 26, 2015As millennials begin to enter the home-buying market in larger numbers, homes will get a little smaller, laundry rooms will be essential, and home technology will become increasingly prevalent, said panelists during an International Builders' Show press conference on home trends and millennials' home preferences. NAHB Assistant Vice President of Research Rose Quint predicted that the growing... more »
December 1, 2014For the third consecutive year, Ply Gem Industries will host the ProTalk Education Series at the 2015 NAHB International Builders' Show. Throughout the three-day event, Ply Gem will present more than 10 informational courses, several of which are NAHB approved for continuing education credits. The sessions will feature content relevant to show attendees such as connected home technology,... more »
October 15, 2014The first day of the Western Region meeting for the American Architectural Manufacturers Association began with discussion of air barriers from Laverne Dalgleish, executive director for the Air Barrier Association of America. "There are two key problem areas for air barriers: the roof/wall interface and the fenestration interface," Dalgleish said. Leaks in air barriers present a... more »
October 14, 2014Special celebrations are planned to mark the 20th anniversary of the Win-Door show, to be held Nov. 18-20, 2014, at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre in Canada. The event will feature a special opening night party on the show floor featuring a performance by the "Blus Bros" tribute band. Win-Door supporters and a host of prominent individuals will also be recognized at the party.... more »
October 7, 2014Lead generation and customer retention topped discussions at the recent Window & Door Dealers Forum, hosted by the Window and Door Dealers Alliance in Las Vegas. There, dealers from across the country shared ideas on how to market to current and potential customers. Here are some tips that came out of the session: Informational videosPeter Morrison, Architectural Visions Inc. (avi), and Tom... more »
September 29, 2014In a charity event organized by World Vision and AAMA that was held during the AAMA 2014 Fall Conference, volunteers filled 500 backpacks with school supplies and hand-written notes of encouragement to children at Hodgkins and FM Day Title I elementary schools in the Denver, Colo., area. Volunteers traveled to the school to distribute the backpacks in person. "World Vision's partnership... more »
September 18, 2014Michael Hodgson, ConSol founder, spoke at the American Architectural Manufacturers Association 2014 Fall Conference during a Sept. 16 general session. His presentation, "California Regulatory Proceedings Impacting the Nation," discussed how California's energy policy is driving the market to time-of-use energy pricing, incentivizing ways to reduce peak load and detailing how the... more »
September 14, 2014Discover the all new YKK AP Texas Manufacturing Center located at 346 E. Belt Line Road, Suite 600, Coppell, Texas 75019, during an open house, Sept. 26, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Tour the new facility and get to know YKK AP's team of dedicated local professionals as well as members of the YKK AP executive leadership team. Prizes, drawings, games, and give-aways will be available throughout the day... more »
September 2, 2014The American Architectural Manufacturers Association is still accepting registrations for the upcoming AAMA 2014 Fall Conference. It will be held Sept. 14-17 at The Westin in Westminster, Colo. Those interested in making a hotel reservation at the Westin may contact Florence Nicolici directly. Exhibitor spots for the Supplier Product Display are still available, although time is running out to... more »
September 2, 2014The National Association of Home Builders officially opened online registration today for the 2015 NAHB International Builders' Show, the largest annual light construction tradeshow in the world. The 2015 show, to be held in Las Vegas, Jan. 20-22, is part of the second annual Design & Construction Week, a co-location with the Kitchen and Bath Industry Show, hosted by the National Kitchen and... more »


text:
A Possible Wrench in the Extension Hopes for McCutchen
Wondering why the Pittsburgh Pirates took so long to promote Pedro Alvarez to the majors this year? Perhaps it was due to the new low cut-off for Super Two eligible players. C. Trent Rosecrans of CBS Sports released the Super Two list for the 2011 season (h/t MLBTR), with the cutoff being 2 years, 122 days. This marks the first time the Super Two cut-off has been below 2 years and 130 days. As expected, Ross Ohlendorf will be Super Two eligible this off-season.
What is a Super Two player? As you may know, all players with 0-3 years of service time receive the league minimum, while any player with 3-6 years of service time is eligible for arbitration. There is an exception, and that would be the Super Two players. Super Two players are the top 17% of players who meet the following...
This content is for Pirates Prospects subscribers only. Subscribers get access to all of our daily articles on the Pirates and their minor league system, with live coverage throughout the system on a daily basis. Our lowest rates are $2.22 per month under our Top Prospect Plan, which also gets you a 40% discount on the 2017 Prospect Guide. Subscribe today to access all of our daily coverage of the Pirates' system.
If you're already a member, you can log in below. If you think you're receiving this message in error, please e-mail firstname.lastname@example.com.
Tim is the owner and editor in chief of Pirates Prospects. He started the site in January 2009, and turned it into his full time job during the 2011 season. Prior to starting Pirates Prospects, Tim worked with AccuScore.com, providing MLB, NHL, and NFL coverage to various national media outlets, including ESPN Insider, USA Today, Yahoo Sports, and the Wall Street Journal. He also writes the annual Prospect Guide, which is sold through the site. Tim lives in Bradenton, where he provides live coverage all year of Spring Training, mini camp, instructs, the Bradenton Marauders, and the GCL Pirates.


text:
I am making a city for a movie. I didn't want to use the Skyscraper plugin, I wanted to make it myself. It will be a MASSIVE project, but oh well!
Anyway, I have some concerns about how I plan to do it.
Quick summary: I created a plane, sub-divided it, and I basically chose different faces and extruded them upward. BAM! Instant skyscrapers to work on. However, my concern is that now, I don't have individual skyscrapers to work with i.e. if I try to select one as an object, obviously, it will select the entire plane. I don't mind too much working this way, but due to inexperience, I don't think I am aware of possible problems I could have along the way.
My second option, obviously, is to create them separately out of cubes. However, this would mean needing to make literally hundreds (possibly thousands) of separate skyscrapers. I could work on each one separately, but this would be very difficult; mostly placing each one just so on the plane. I don't mind doing it this way, I just think the first option would be easier.
Any suggestions? Maybe you have a better way of doing this? Any help is greatly appreciated!


text:
E-Cigarettes at Dinner? No Problem at These Top Smoke-Free RestaurantsBy
Ten years after New York City banned smoking in restaurants and bars, diners are puffing away once again.
E-cigarettes—battery-powered cylinders that deliver vaporized nicotine—are becoming the drug of choice for gourmands who'd rather not stand out in the rain, heat, or snow to enjoy a few puffs. Manufacturers of the devices, which hook up to computers like iPhones (some download!) and glow like phosphorescent jellyfish, pitch the cigarettes as odorless, ash-free, and without tobacco smoke. For some restaurateurs, that means e-cigarettes fall outside the antismoking law.
"We allow it," says Adele LeGault, general manager at Michael White's Costata, an expensive SoHo steakhouse where she encounters at least one e-smoker each night.
Other big-name operators are still grappling with the issue. Neither Danny Meyer's Union Square Hospitality Group (Maialino, Shake Shack) nor Daniel Boulud's collection of French spots has an e-cigarette policy. Eleven Madison Park, where dinner for two can easily approach $900, says it would permit e-smoking in its lounge but not in the dining room. Gabriel Stulman's more casual group of eateries (Perla, Fedora, Montmartre) forbids it.
Here's what some of New York's most prominent chefs and restaurateurs have to say about e-cigarettes:
1. Le Bernardin
"It happened once last week in the lounge; we let the person smoke. It's not happening enough for us to have a policy yet. It's totally new. I'm sure if we see more and more people using the cigarettes, we are going to have to decide what to do. Do we accept it or not? Personally, I don't find it elegant. It's weird to see someone smoking with a plastic cigarette." —Eric Ripert, chef and co-owner
2. Momofuku (Ssäm Bar, Má Pêche, Ko)
"We kindly ask that guests do not smoke electronic cigarettes at our restaurants in New York City, as we find it disruptive to other diners. We try our best to create a comfortable dining service for all of our guests." —Sue Chan, spokeswoman
3. Major Food Group (Torrisi, Carbone, ZZ's Clam Bar)
"It's not something we encounter very often, though I know it's becoming more and more popular. Currently we don't encourage it, but we do allow it as long as it doesn't bother other customers." —Jeff Zalaznick, managing partner
4. Empellon
"Strangely we have never actually seen one of these contraptions in our restaurants. If the product is designed to be completely odorless, I think asking someone to take it out of his or her mouth is difficult. That might be the equivalent of telling someone to get rid of a toothpick or some other object. I think you should leave them be unless they're disturbing other customers in some way, and then you have to ask them nicely to put it away." —Alex Stupak, chef/owner
5. Myriad Restaurant Group (Nobu, Nobu 57, Tribeca Grill)
"It's kind of a new thing. My gut reaction would be to say smoking is smoking. I probably would tell you we don't have a policy; we do it on a case-by-case basis. If it's not going to bother anyone, I don't think we should have a rule, but if someone were to complain, we'd ask them not to smoke." —Drew Nieporent, owner
6. Little Wisco (Perla, Montmartre, Fedora)
"We do not allow them indoors or outdoors. To me it is a distraction and intrusive, no different than if someone were playing music from their iPhone on the speaker function. Anyone smoking an e-cigarette is forcing their desires and interests on others in a manner with which the other party may not enjoy it. It is the responsibility of the restaurant to try to balance and consider the interests of all of our guests against those of a few." —Gabriel Stulman, owner
7. Altamarea Group (Costata, Ai Fiori, Morini)
"As of recently, there isn't much protocol but they are not as strange as they once were. We see at least one a night at some of the restaurants and allow it, but are monitoring to make sure it doesn't inconvenience other guests." —Olivia Young, spokeswoman
8. The Elm
"We don't mind them. We actually have had a few guests 'light up' in the dining room." —The Management
9. Blanca
"It's never come up. We wouldn't allow it during the meal. We'd probably ask them to go outside. It's a relatively small space and there is kind of an odor to them. It's not disgusting. It smells like steam and weird flavor. But if it's at the end of the meal, and we're done with service and there's no more food around, and people are on their way out, I probably wouldn't have a problem with it." —Carlo Mirarchi, chef and owner
10. Do or Dine
"I'm happy to have them. Nothing is worse than our kitchen having to hold/replate/refire an order because a guest decided to step out for a puff between courses. God forbid the guest smokes American Spirits, as that can be a 10-minute ordeal. My only gripe is that the lights on them are very tacky-looking. They look like a prop I would've had in my raver days." —Justin Warner, chef and owner


text:
" Brand: Wrigley's / Type: Mints "
* Prices may differ from that shown
I'm quite obsessed about having fresh breath and always have mints or chewing gum with me. However, I had recently run out, and asked my sister to get me some mints whilst she was out shopping. I usually get smints, although recently I have been using 'Trebor' quite a lot. So that was what I was expecting. However, my sister said that she couldn't find my 'normal' mints and got me these. They cost about 50p.
These mints are made by 'Extra' (the chewing gum company). They are 'chewy mints' and come in small packs of 38g. The packaging looks like a blue version of the small packs of mintrels you get. It is a very attractive packaging which is very eye catching.
The mints themselves are quite small; like M & Ms and come in four different colours. Each colour represents a different flavour:
Blue - Peppermint
Green - Spearmint
Light Blue - Sweetmint
White - Coolmint
To look at, the mints are very attractive. They certainly look good. I like the fact that there is a different colour for each flavour - although I couldn't remember which one was which. Also, it makes it interesting not knowing which flavour you are going to get.
The mints are very minty and very tasty. They are very refreshing and my mouth felt very fresh and minty for a while afterwards which was good.
I found these mints to be very moreish- once I had opened the packet, I couldn't help but keep reaching for another one.
Whilst I like three of the mints, I am not to keen on the white ones which are the coolmint ones. I mean, I'll eat it if I get it, but I don't really like it. It's always the same with packs like this isn't it? For me, it's the same with Revelsl; I hate the coffee ones, but still eat them if I get it!
I think that these mints are great for on the go. I also think that they are great for busy people, for example those who have jobs that involve meeting people all the time, as whilst chewing gum isn't acceptable at work, you don't want to be sucking on a mint for a long time either, so these are perfect, as they are gone in a couple of seconds, but still leave you with great fresh breath!
My only criticism regarding these mints is the packaging; they tend to spill out of the packet which is annoying!
I also found these mints to be quite addictive! I couldn't stop eating them!
Each packet contains 154 calories.
I would definetely recommend this mints to everyone!
Thanks for reading!
July 2011
xd-o-n-z-x (also posted under xdonzx on ciao)
The mints are very nice: soft and chewy, and pretty minty pastel colours. A bit larger and rounder than the size of an M&M. And the packaging is just like a small pack of M&M's or similar. The price is comparable to other similar small packs of sweets. I would have been very happy with them if they were sugar free. Silly me didn't read the ingredients until I'd already bought them. Sugar is the main ingredient and they are 154 kcals per 38g packet. This surprised me as I thought the Extra brand was a sugar free one, but obviously it isn't. So a tasty minty treat, but not kind to teeth. If you don't mind sugar, and like chewy mints, these are a good option.
I don't normally eat mints and tend to have chewing gum instead, but I saw these for 50p on special offer in Tescos and they looked quite interesting as they're made by Wrigley's Extra and I tend to buy their gum regularly.
They come in a light blue plastic wrapping similar to Wrigley's Extra gum packets, with graphic images of the mints on them with added swoosh and sparkle around them (to show they are minty and refreshing!). The packet is easy to tear open and the bag contains approx 38g of mints in them, which is a decent amount. The mints themselves are small round and with a tough outer shell. They are described as refreshing mini mints with a sweet crunchy shell and soft chewy centre.
The pack contains 4 varieties of mint ('4 refreshing flavours') all colour coded:
* Peppermint (blue)
* Spearmint (green)
* Sweetmint (greeny aqua blue)
* Cool mint (white)
They are quite similar in concept to Trebor Soft Mints, but the mints are a smaller size. They are quite easy and enjoyable to eat as they're chewy and a nice compact size. I like the variety of mint flavours on offer which are nice and flavoursome, although the Coolmint variety is completely pointless, as its not very strong or distinctive in taste so doesn't really add much value to the pack. They should have left it as 3 flavours which was more than enough, as most mints only offer one or two flavours when you buy them anyway!
My only gripe about these mints is with the packet, as once you've torn it open and eaten your first couple of mints, you are then left with an open bag which can easy be spilled anywhere in your bag or pocket. Surely they would be better in a small plastic or cardboard container which has a sealable tab or closing so its easy to store and transport. No-one eats a packet of mints all in one go do they?!! I have to get a rubber band to seal the pack which is quite annoying and embarrassing when you're outside and on the go so I just keep these on my desk at work and eat them there!
I did enjoy these and would be likely buy these again in future whenever I felt like a mint, but only if they changed the packaging!!!


text:
Google search
VB search
Administrator Messages
Comments, Suggestions about the forum ONLY.
Home Page News
Members Corner
Welcome to the GSD/FAQ's for the first time owner
Introductions & Welcome Mat
Pictures! Pictures! Pictures!
Germanshepherds.com Forum Support Help Desk
Special Interest
Weekly Discussion Topics
Take a Poll
Current Dog Affairs
Favorite Links, Books and Videos!
GSD Classifieds
Germanshepherds.com Vendors
Trading Post -> Non-Commercial Trades and Sales
Supporting Site Sponsors
My Pet Peed
The Honest Kitchen
Life With Our Dogs
General Information
Happy Birthday / Gotcha Day
In Loving Memory
Preparing to Say Good Bye
Events & Club Info
The Puppy Place
Finding the Right Puppy
Choosing A Breeder
General Puppy Stuff
Training Our Puppy (basic)
Puppy Behavior
Feeding Our Puppy
Puppies/Raw Diets
Development & Socialization
Ears Up??????
Training & Behavior of the GSD
Training Theory & Methods
How do I (teach my dog to)?
Equipment (how to use/where to find)
General Behavior
Aggression (the good, the bad & the ugly)
Finding a Good Trainer
GSD Rescue Information
Non-Urgent GSD Rescue & Adoption
Follow-up from
Rescue, Foster & Adoption Information (General)
Rescue Stories & Where are they now?
Rescue Transport. How YOU can HELP
Lost and Found
Health & Wellness
Health Issues
Diet & Nutrition
B.A.R.F./Raw Feeding
Basic Care
The Senior Dog
Holistic/Homeopathic Practices
Show those Hips
Thinking About Becoming A Breeder?
Pregnancy, Whelping & Raising a Litter
Breeding - General
Bloodlines & Pedigrees
The Breed Standard
Genetic Issues
Critique My Dog
Schutzhund/IPO and Protection Sports
Schutzhund/IPO Training
Other Protection Sports
Dog Sports
Obedience & Rally
Showing (Conformation)
Miscellaneous Dog Sports
Working Dogs
Search & Rescue
Guide, Therapy & Service Dogs
Police K-9
Military Dogs
Personal Protection Dogs
The Café
Chat Room
Fun and Games Room
Web Board Testing
Testing Forum
The Best of the Board Archives
Archive 1: Special Interest & Member's Corner
Archive 2: GSD Rescue
Archive 3: Life With Our Dogs & The Dog Zone
Archive 4: The Puppy Place
Archive 5: Health & Wellness
Archive 6: Breeding
Archive 7: Schutzhund, Dog Sports & Working GSD
Active Topics
Today's Posts
Remember Me?
German Shepherd Dog Forums
Content Wrapper
One year old weight
View Single Post
post #7
Harry and Lola
Elite Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,129
He is very tall and long, he does not look overweight, his weight looks great to me. The average 1yo GSD male is around the 75pound range, however looking at yours, he is not average due to his height and length.
Guidelines are good to go by in terms of knowing average weights, if your GSD is way under or over then if makes you question whether there is something wrong or not. In my case Harry, my 3yo GSD male, was way under the average weight for his age, so this sort of woke me up and I questioned the vet why - turns out there is a medical reason and he is being treated for it now.
With yours, average guidelines are making you and your Vet question why he is heavy - which is great. So you and your Vet need to consider why - is it a medical issue (I doubt it), his high weight is clearly due to larger height and length.
Some Vets are familiar with good weights for GSDs, some are not, this is a great opportunity to point out to your Vet that yes he is way above average weight for his age, however his height and length are above average too.
This dog is a perfect example of using your eyes and hands to determine a healthy weight. Look at him from above - does he have a nice trim weight. Look at his sides - can you clearly see his ribs (you shouldn't be able to). Feel his sides - can you feel his ribs through a thin layer of fat? Due to his larger body proportions, I would use this technique for him rather than weight guidelines.
if your GSD is eating and eating and eating and losing weight - please consider testing for EPI.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Harry and Lola is offline
Harry and Lola
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Harry and Lola
Find More Posts by Harry and Lola
-- GermanShepherds.com (Full)
-- GermanShepherds.com (Classic)
-- GermanShepherds.com (Mobile)
Contact Us
German Shepherds : German Shepherd Dog Forums
Privacy Statement
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to
Google Chrome
Terms of Use


text:
a place for zinesters - writers and readers
Time: November 13, 2010 from 11am to 5pm
Location: Leeds University Union, UK
City/Town: Leeds
Website or Map: http://www.footprinters.co.uk
Phone: 0113 262 4408
Event Type: zine, fair
Organized By: Andy (Footprint Workers Co-op)
Latest Activity: Nov 11, 2010
Roll up zinesters!
Footprint Workers Coop, radical printing collective based in Leeds, are co-hosting a zine fair in celebration of 10 years of printing zines and all things radical, ranty and DIY.
The zine fair will feature stalls from a zillion zinesters, community action groups, radical campaigns and collectives, art exhibitions and workshops on zine-making, eco printing, workers cooperatives, cabaret performances, veggie/vegan food, and more!
The after party at the CommonPlace will be 10th birthday party themed with jelly, streamers, balloons and fabulous frolicksome bands, dancing, slam poetry and maybe even pass the parcel!
The zine fair is being organised as a collaboration between Footprint Workers Coop, Green Action - Leeds Uni eco-activist group, and others in the Leeds DIY/activist community if you'd like to get involved get in touch!
To book a stall or get involved email:
footprint @ footprinters.co.uk


text:
Community + Coffee
(with a side of bacon)
Since it's founding, SMBMSP has been a regularly occurring event where like minded folks across the Twin Cities get together to share & learn about social media.
Online membership has grown to over 2,300 professionals from all different disciplines, and many partnerships, jobs, career changes, and friendships have blossomed because of this group's ability to connect people who enjoy sharing what they know! More »


text:
"As though we needed any more evidence, President Obama has demonstrated anew his utter disregard for the safety and security of the Arizona people. Within the last two hours, I have been notified the Obama administration has revoked the 287(g) agreement under the authority of which Arizona law enforcement officers have partnered with the federal government in the enforcement of immigration law.
"Of course, it is no coincidence that this announcement comes immediately on the heels of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling upholding the constitutionality of the heart of Arizona's anti-illegal immigration law: SB 1070. It's worth noting that 68 law enforcement entities in 24 states have functioning 287(g) agreements with the federal government. But it appears the only agreements eliminated today were those in Arizona, the state that happens to be on the front lines of America's fight against illegal immigration. We are on our own, apparently.
"I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. The Obama administration has fought the people of Arizona at every turn -- downplaying the threat that a porous border poses to our citizens, filing suit in order to block our State from protecting itself, unilaterally granting immunity to tens of thousands of illegal aliens living in our midst, and now this. Still, the disarmament of Arizona's 287(g) agreements is a new low, even for this administration.
"Since 2006, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security credits the 287(g) program with identifying nearly 300,000 potentially-removable aliens nationwide. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has trained and certified more than 1,500 state and local officers to assist in the enforcement of immigration law, including many in Arizona. In fact, even as the President was wiping out Arizona's 287(g) agreements, the ICE website itself continued to herald the collaborative approach of the 287(g) program, noting, "Terrorism and criminal activity are most effectively combated through a multi-agency/multi-authority approach that encompasses federal, state and local resources, skills and expertise.'
"The President's action should be of concern to all Americans. This fight is not over. President Obama may disregard Congress. He may target individual states like Arizona. He may generally act with impunity. But he is not above judgment -- and the American people will have theirs very soon."
Source: http://www.azgovernor.gov/Newsroom/Gov_PR.asp


text:
Kassel 28" Cuckoo Clock
Item # WX2-235748
Kassel 28" Cuckoo Clock
Item # WX2-235748
You May Also Like
CASTLECREEK 9 Light Whitetail Antler ChandelierBuyer's Club $269.99 Non-Member $299.99
CASTLECREEK 6 Light Whitetail Antler ChandelierBuyer's Club $224.99 Non-Member $249.99
Realtree Coir Doormat,18"x29.5"LBuyer's Club $10.79 Non-Member $11.99
Candle by the Hour 40-hour Candle Refills, 2 PackBuyer's Club $17.99 Non-Member $19.99
Bone Collector Coir Doormat, 18"x29.5"LBuyer's Club $10.79 Non-Member $11.99
- Details & Specs
KasselTM 28" Cuckoo Clock brings whimsical, folksy fun to your day!
Get ready for smiles when the Clock strikes "fun"... every hour, on the hour! The history of the Cuckoo Clock goes back over 300 years... first becoming a sensation in the watch-making Black Forest region of Germany in the 18th century. And this 28 x 21 x 8" Cuckoo Clock from KasselTM evokes the same charm and artistry that made them so popular centuries ago!You'll go cuckoo:
- Gorgeous wood carved accents, pendulum and weights
- Electronic chime
- Bird comes out to "cuckoo" on the hour
- Measures 28 x 21 x 8". 12 lbs.
- Requires 2 "D" Batteries (not included).
Don't wait another tick... order ONLINE today!
- Reviews
- Frequently Asked Questions
- Articles & Tips


text:
Sometimes you have to spend the bucks for a good tool.
View Single Post
Irelands child
Registered User
Wiki Editor
Last wiki edit:
Ford engine specifications
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 5,369
Edits: 8
Thanks: 59
Thanked 530 Times in 410 Posts
Irelands child's Photo Album
It looks like a big step up from my HF 90 degree grinder. It is a weakling - and when it finally dies will be replaced by something better - it turns Rollocks as long as I have the pressure turned up.
As far as the tool truck guy, Beenaway is correct but I do have a problem with several hundred percent MORE than the US made Craftsman, Kobalt and Husky tools sold at the Big Box stores.
While I do have a lot of Snap-on and Mac tools, I just can't afford them any more. Take a ferinstance(today's prices):
1/2" 12 point standard box/open end Snap-on = $23.95
Same thing - Craftsman = $7.19
3.33 times more than Craftsman !!!!
12 piece set from Sears = $49.99 (1/4" to 7/8")
11 piece set from Snap-on = $337.55(3/8" to 1")
6.75 times the Sears set
Warrantee, from experience, Craftsman is better though you do have to take defects to a store - an inconvenience.
My history with a couple of Snap-on guys was that it was a Spanish Inquisition of questions as to why his tool could have possibly failed. Is their door-to-door convenience really worth that much more?
Don't take this the wrong way - I love my Snap-on's and have several thousand dollars worth of them, but they are far outstripping reality as far as value added. Specialty tools - I advocate the best that you can afford - but can you justify a $300 tool you might use a half dozen times vs a $150 tool that will do the same thing.
Brian probably uses that Matco grinder every day and is well worth every penny it cost him. I can't justify that cost, though a $50-$60 grinder would probably suit me fine.
Oh c*@p, I got my soapbox out again - sorry guys, it's just been put away
Irelands child
Irelands child
View Public Profile
Find all posts by Irelands child


text:
Presley And Bowker Lead Indians To Snap Losing Streak
Indianapolis Indians 3, Louisville Bats 2
[ box ]
Alex Presley had three doubles and a single tonight.
Seven hits, including 4 doubles, from LF Alex Presley and RF John Bowker, plus 10 innings and a throwing error, and the Indians snapped their 5-game losing streak with a win over the Louisville Bats at Victory Field tonight. Presley and Bowker scored all of the Indians' runs, and they took care of most of the team's 11 hits. The win puts the Indians back into a tie with the Bats for second place in the International League Western Division. Both teams are 14 games behind first-place Columbus in the division standings, and are tied for third place (6 games back) in the IL Wild Card race.
Both starting pitchers tonight were named Thompson, and neither Thompson was involved...
This content is for Pirates Prospects subscribers only. Subscribers get access to all of our daily articles on the Pirates and their minor league system, with live coverage throughout the system on a daily basis. Our lowest rates are $2.22 per month under our Top Prospect Plan, which also gets you a 40% discount on the 2017 Prospect Guide. Subscribe today to access all of our daily coverage of the Pirates' system.
If you're already a member, you can log in below. If you think you're receiving this message in error, please e-mail firstname.lastname@example.com.
Nancy grew up in Rochester, NY, where her father indoctrinated her to the love of baseball as a small child. He taught her to keep score at the age of 5, and she hasn't stopped since. She now lives in the Indianapolis area with her husband and two sons. Nancy has followed the Indians on both the Most Valuable Network and the Bloguin group, before joining Pirates Prospects in 2011. She provides daily game recaps from Indianapolis, plus player analysis from the guys she sees live at the games.
Update later on Kranick, possibly in the preview tomorrow. I…


text:
Around the world, 33.3 million people are living with HIV. Approximately 22.5 million live in Sub-Saharan Africa. WUSC's goal is to help combat HIV and AIDS, malaria and other diseases that stand in the way of sustainable development. In support of Millennium Development Goal #6 which aims to not only halt, but to also begin to reverse the spread of HIV and AIDS by 2015, WUSC contributes to education, care, treatment and support efforts by:
- integrating reproductive health workshops for young girls in Ghana and Kenya;
- collaborating with the Government of Botswana to develop national prevention strategies and programs for youth;
- building the capacity of local organizations in Botswana, Malawi and Burkina Faso to improve their ability to integrate and promote gender equality between women and men in HIV and AIDS activities and services;
- improving access to care for people living with HIV and AIDS in Malawi and increase awareness of Canadians on the issue through the Bike for AIDS campaign;
- increasing access to prevention and quality support services and promoting income-generating activities for people affected with HIV and AIDS in Burkina Faso.
Volunteer overseas to help local organizations in Sub-Saharan Africa to support their response to HIV and AIDS. Donate or spread the word through the Bike for AIDS campaign in your own community to raise awareness about the issue.


text:
CANADA STOCKS-TSX may open lower, commodities drag
June 18 (Reuters) - Canadian stock index futures pointed to a lower open on Tuesday, dragged down by weaker commodity prices as investors looked forward to the two-day Federal Reserve policy meeting which could give investors hints on the future of its monetary easing program.
* The European Central Bank is "ready to act" if need be to aid the euro zone economy and recent signs of market stabilization mean that its interest rates are becoming a more effective tool again.
* German analyst and investor sentiment rose for a second straight month in June, a leading survey showed, suggesting Europe's largest economy is on track for a modest recovery after a weak end to 2012 and sluggish start to this year.
* Talisman Enegy Inc is exploring the sale of its shale assets in the Eagle Ford basin in south Texas, hoping it could raise as much as $2 billion, two people familiar with the matter said on Monday.
* New York-based hedge fund Third Point said it has raised its stake in Sony Corp and urged the Japanese company to create an independent board to run a partially spun-off entertainment arm with Sony's CEO, Kazuo Hirai, as its chairman.
* German cable operator Kabel Deutschland confirmed on Monday that they have received a preliminary approach from U.S. media group Liberty Global after a British newspaper reported that the company had put forward a 7.5-billion-euro bid for the company.
MARKET SNAPSHOT Continued...


text:
Organizing Citations
Law and Public Policy
Welcome to the course guide for Law and Public Policy!
Research materials and links are provided to Law and Public Policy students for Fall, 2014 in order to aid any further inquiries you may wish to make in connection with any aspect of the coursework and to help you respond to extra-credit research questions that Professor Arons may announce in class from time to time.
My contact information is in the box to the right. Feel free to call or email me. I'm here to help you with your assignments and any other research needs you might have for this class.
Quick Start
- Academic Search PremierA good starting point: articles from key journals in many scholarly disciplines, with some trade journals and magazines, 1975-present.
- Westlaw Campus ResearchLegal encyclopedias, law reviews, and legal treatises; case, statutory, and regulatory law; newspapers and magazines; business data, 1980's-present.
Subject Guide
Contact Info
Send Email
Law, Legal Studies, Public Policy


text:
The Six Pack July 1st, 2010
The Six Pack June 10th, 2010
Greg Bedard
Green Bay Packers beat reporter Greg Bedard talks about the 2010 OTA's.
The Six Pack May 2nd, 2010
Some Peoples Viking's Fans
It's very rare that I have anything bad to say about the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Packer coverage. In fact, I think Greg Bedard is perhaps the finest Packer reporter I have ever read. There are some apparently who need to take a cue from Bedard, because articles like this one leave me scratching my head while wondering, where do I apply?
In the midst of the Leroy Butler interview last night on Cheesehead Nation, I think the most important point of the night was made by the esteemed Mr. Greg Bedard. The Packers don't have "that guy."
Time to spread the love (or lack thereof) around a bit this Saturday morning. Here's six Packer stories to sound off on. We got tall-boys today.


text:
Golden Square: dual use apartment
Luxurious apartment situated in the heart of Monaco.
Situated in a stylish 'époque' residency, next to the Casino gardens, this beautiful one bedroom apartment offers a surface of 68m². The apartment is fully renovated in a modern style.
The property offers and entrance hall, a nice living room opening onto a balcony, open plan fully equipped kitchen, master bedroom, large dressing room, bathroom and guest toilet. Cellar in the building.
The Palais Saint James is a sought after residency because of the very central location, next to the Hermitage hotel and accross from the Casino.
The apartment has dual use and can be used additionaly to host a company or as office space.
This document does not form part of any offer or contract. All measurements, areas and distances are approximate. The information and plans contained herein are believed to be correct, however, their accuracy is not guaranteed. The photographs show only certain parts of the property at the time they were taken. This offer is subject to change of price or other conditions, without prior notice.