BBC Blog Network

User Profile

talorthane

Listed below are comments made by talorthane between Tuesday, 21st April 2009 and Friday, 24th April 2009.

«Newer
Older»

Courageous stuff 5:27pm on 24 Apr 2009 #324 Northhighlander

"Freedom always comes at a cost."

That cost is responsibility, which is actually a good thing.

"I think I would like to know what that cost is or is likely to be first."

If you're talking about financial cost, it is a red herring of a question.

What will be the cost of continuing with the current constitutional set-up?

The answer is, as shown by recent circumstances, that we don't know because we can't predict the future. What we would do, as a part of the UK, is to adapt to circumstances. And place that responsibility on those who we elect to find the solutions.

In the case of an independent Scotland the answer is the same, we adapt to our circumstances, like every other country on the planet.

Even Iceland, where recovery is well underway.
Courageous stuff 2:20pm on 24 Apr 2009 #297 Northhighlander

"In Scotland, surely this crisis should have been used by the SNP to develop arguments that show that this gives a great opportunity for Scotland to go alone. What could we do better to get out of the recession on our own? Where is Salmonds alternative proposal for how Scotland should get out of the recession independently? No new ideas, more rehashing of the same old rhetoric."

I think you have overlooked the fact that Salmond, Swinney and the SNP have been developing these arguments.

Salmond criticised the Government at the time of the bank crisis for the one-measure-at-a-time-in-the-hope-that-this-one-might-work approach. He stated clearly, right at the start of the problem that the UK Government should be hitting the problem with everything they had immediately to protect confidence in the market. But they didn't and things got worse.

Salmond and Swinney have also been making it clear that Scotland is doing all it can with the powers it has, but that is not enough. It needs more powers to be able to tailor Scotland's response to Scotland's needs. Now the Calman Commission is recommending the devoltion of borrowing powers and possibly other financial levers.

The argument is clear, if Scotland is not to continue trailing in the wake of whatever problems beset the UK, it needs it own powers for its own distinct problems.

The acquisition and deployment of these new powers will show how Scotland can go it alone. But that is the very reason why Labour do not want any new powers to transfer to Holyrood.
Courageous stuff 2:12pm on 24 Apr 2009 #292. bighullabaloo

"How thick does someone need to be to accuse an opponent of making a mistake that a third party has already publicy admitted they didn't make? To save you the bother of working it out, the answer is: "as thick as a plank"."

Either thick or completely deceiptful.

His attempt to use this story to undermine the First Minister was probably decided as soon as the interview was aired, and before the apology was made.

However, as a former Maths teacher he can no credibly have believed that the First Minister's answer to that question was anything other than comprehensively correct.

For him to then proceed with this attack only highlights how desperate his position is where he has to adopt knowingly misleading claims within the chamber.

Gray should be brought to task on this behaviour.
Courageous stuff 2:02pm on 24 Apr 2009 #291 northhighlander

"Okay, we agree that the money is being removed before we get it. However are you both arguing that efficiencies of this order cannot be made?"

I agree that it is possible that efficiency savings could possibly be made.

However, the way to achieve this is to set targets for makings these savings before the budgets are cut.

Then the Treasury has work with the Scottish Government, and any other department, to establish which efficiency savings are sustainable in the longer term without having an impact on service delivery in general.

The budget should only be altered after this process to ensure that cuts in delivery are not necessary.

It is also possible that cuts need to be made. But if that is another matter, and if that is so then the debate can only begin when the Treasury admits that it needs to make cuts.

Then the debate can assess what are the possible areas for cuts at a UK wide level, looking at all options, whether reserved or devolved.

It is about choices.

The debate about ID cards or Trident, has to now include what services will be cut if these schemes are progressed.

And if we don't want these cuts to occur then the choice is to abandon these schemes.
Courageous stuff 12:59pm on 24 Apr 2009 #275 northhighlander

"You cannot cut your way out of a recession"

Alistair Darling, Budget Speech, 22nd April 2009.

So it is clear, from Labour's position, you don't make cuts during a recession.

The next question is:

Are these cuts, or are they efficiancy savings?

And efficiency saving is where you already have your budget in place and, afterwards, through identifying more efficient mechanisms of delivery, you manage to make savings. The savings can then be used to provide more of the same or to do other things. The level of svaings is unknown beforehand, so targets are used to aim for, but services are not threatened if the savings cannot be found.

A cut is where the budget is reduced before it is identified if and how that savings can be found. The savings must be found even if more efficient mechanisms can be found or not. Targets are not used, as the budgets are already lowered to the set level. If more efficient means cannot be found the certain parts of the delivery must be cut.

The Chancellor did not identify how these savings could be made and made it clear that there will be no more funds if efficiency savings could not be found.

These measures are cuts.

The only question that remains is whether the country will have found a way out of recession by the time that these cuts are in place.

On the basis that Alistair Darling thinks we will have recovered by next year then he may be correct.

Unfortunately, he seems to be the only one who thinks that this is possible, never mind likely.

If everyone else is correct, and that we are still in recession next year, then at that time, the Chancellor will have to go back on one of two things.

He will either need to change his view that you cannot cut yourself out of a recession, or he will have to cancel these cuts.

Then, again, by this time next year we will be in the middle of an election campaign.
Courageous stuff 12:35pm on 24 Apr 2009 deanthetory

"Here are the figures (see the analysis- good - on UK polling report)

Scottish Parliament constituency voting intention:
CON 15%(+1), LAB 30%(-4), LDEM 13%(+1), SNP 37%(+2)

Scottish Parliament regional voting intention:
CON 15%(nc), LAB 28%(-4), LDEM 13%(+2), SNP 37%(+7)

Westminster voting intention: CON 21%(+1), LAB 32%(-5), LDEM 13%(+2), SNP 30%(+3)"

I think the most interesting thing about this poll is that is was conducted on Tuesday and Wednesday of this week.

This was just enough time for the Chancellor, the Prime Minister and the rest of Labour to put their spin on what the budget meant.

However, it was conducted before the media and other parties had a chance to pull the budget apart and identify what the real consequences of Labour's decade in power has really brought about.

Roll on the next poll.
On Budget 6:08pm on 21 Apr 2009 #70 Reluctant-Expat

"68. What is the point of this statement:

"It would not be surprising for the Treasury to try to cut the Scottish block grant on the basis of Westminster department cuts for both reserved and devolved matters."

That's just more silly conspiratorial claims with no basis whatsoever."

On the contrary, the Treasury has previous form in this area.

Such as the £1.2 billion of extra money spent upgrading English prisons where, as a devolved area, a consequential payment should have been passed on to the Scottish Government.

Instead, the Treasury claimed that while this spending was on prisons, a devolved area, the oney had come from savings made in other, reserved departments.

Exactly the kind of ploy that I suggested above.
On Budget 5:32pm on 21 Apr 2009 At the STUC conference, it would appear that the political landscape is shifter ever more in favour of independence.

More and more the unions in Scotland seem to be building bridges with the SNP while questioning their loyalty to Labour.

Apart from the ovations given to the First Minister, it is interesting reading the agenda for the conference.

There are numerous references to devolved matters where initiatives have been welcomed, and where the challenges for congress were mainly in relation to reserved issues.

However, one specific proposal caught my attention.

It was only a few years ago that the Fire Brigades Union tabled a thinly veilled attack on the SNP, where they called for the STUC to denounce any nationalist based political party.

Now they are calling for employment law to be devloved to the Scottish Government where, they say, it would be more effectively and fairly implemented.
On Budget 5:24pm on 21 Apr 2009 #66 Reluctant Expat

"The cuts are going to happen in England and therefore, under the Barnett Formula that Salmond applies so often, cuts are coming our way too."

Not necessarily.

If the cuts occur only to the budgets of reserved departments then there shold be no cut in the block grant for Scotland.

However, the rhetoric coming from Westminster for months seem to be preparing Scotland for a cut, so these cuts in England must be to English departments, for devolved matters, too.

But the cuts have to be identified across Westminster departments in detail in order to identify how much consequentials should apply to Scotland. It would not be surprising for the Treasury to try to cut the Scottish block grant on the basis of cuts Westminster department cuts for both reserved and devolved matters.

However, at least we appear to agree that the Treasury have been misleading to refer to these cuts as "efficiency savings".
On Budget 3:59pm on 21 Apr 2009 #51 Reluctant-Expat

"49. So....you don't actually know either then? I can guess and estimate for myself, thank you!"

Why don't you email the Scottish Government, as they'll know better than anyone on here.

"By the way, the SNP's 06-07 version was only released in June 08 after several months of delays caused by those 3,000+ recalculations. I believe the previous versions were usually released each November."

Actually, it wasn't the SNP version of the report, it was the official Scottish Government report.

And if they had introductions 3,000+ recalculations and new calculations, and were still committed to finding better ways to analise the data, then I'd expect them to be no less thorough in subsequent years.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

talorthane