Calman's cautious contribution
Anyone remember the Constitutional Convention? I certainly do: I covered it for so long they struck a commemorative medal for me. (For the avoidance of doubt, that last bit is hyperbole.)
It was not always the most fascinating of experiences. (Now, that bit demonstrates another figure of speech, namely litotes: that is, pure cheek from me.)
However, in the long - very long - term, the convention produced the devolved parliament we presently love and loathe in comparable measure.
There was a very precise read-through from the scheme drafted and, more specifically, revised by the convention to the Scotland Act, legislated by Her Majesty's Houses of Parliament, there assembled.
Maybe we need to regard the Calman Commission and its attendant debate in the same light. Cautious, steady - yet ultimately productive.
But, boy, is it cautious. Recently, we had the submission from UK Government departments to the commission. And a splendidly Panglossian document it was too. Nothing need change. All, it seemed, was for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
With one exception. If you chaps at Holyrood could see your way to being a bit more understanding over nuclear power, then all would be fine.
Now we are shortly to receive an interim report from the expert panel established by Calman to examine alternatives for funding Scotland. Similarly, I expect it to be quite brilliantly cautious, noting that no alternative to the current set-up meets all the criteria for a funding system: namely, that it should provide equity, accountability, autonomy, stability and efficiency.
For example, you could assign tax revenues to Scotland - say, the product of VAT or income tax. But that might be largely cosmetic, affording no real autonomy.
There would still be the need for equalisation grants from the Treasury to cover other spending needs and the products of other taxation, not least North Sea oil.
And there's the rub. Say there's a new system of assigned revenues.
Say that lessens by volume the block grant from the Treasury as, by definition, it would do. Say that allows politicians south of the border to argue that Scotland is getting less directly from the UK taxpayer, addressing a political concern over cross-border equity.
Say, though, that then prompts a necessary review of need in order to calculate the extent of the top-up that would still be required.
Would that be good news for Scotland - where spending is currently higher per head than in England? Ain't necessarily so - especially if the review is driven by the Treasury.
However, I believe today's report will be a vital contribution to the debate over funding. I believe it will give a hard edge to the fluffy, ill-considered debate which frequently surrounds the Barnett formula. I believe it will set out in substantial detail the alternatives: upside and downside.
Cautious? Yes, but rightly so. This is not an issue to be rushed or forced. Caution is sensible.
However, there is a political dimension too - which leads me to think that the Calman exercise will not, after all, mirror the convention.
The convention was wide-ranging, embracing much of civic Scotland. But, politically, it was driven by Labour and the Liberal Democrats with a common objective of delivering an elected parliament with substantial powers, within the United Kingdom.
I still believe that the competing interests within Calman may ultimately prove divergent. The LibDems want radical reform, including substantial tax powers. Labour is much more cautious and, at the UK Government level, partly preoccupied with the wish to placate English opinion.
The Conservatives are, quite understandably, using Calman as a think tank to prepare for what they might have to confront in government, should they win power at Westminster. This has a long way to go.
I'm 
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~19~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Quite, Brian Taylor, "Maybe we need to regard the Calman Commission and its attendant debate in the same light. Cautious, steady - yet ultimately productive"
WHAT UTTER NONSENSE!
C'mon Brian even you have to concede that Calman is just a group of forelock tugging Unionists who are too scared to break wind in case it upsets Gordon Brown.
We know what Calman represents - it is just another attack on Scottish identity.
Complain about this comment
#1 minuend
The presence of several higher-up Tories and LibDems (including Jim Wallace and the current convenor of the SLDs) on the commission would seem to cast doubt on your theory.
The reason the commission is unlikely to produce a strong agenda for change is as Brian said: the Tories would fewer powers, Labour want the status quo and the LibDems want actual reform. It's next to impossible to square these goals without being overly cautious.
I think Calman will come up with some valid points, but it looks like making the case for more powers will be left to the individual parties.
Complain about this comment
If only there was some kind of new constitutional arrangement which, in a stroke, would remove the need for all of this pointless tinkering and talk of inequality between the "nations". If only...
Complain about this comment
OK, Calman is even worse than we thought. All this money and all this time for nothing.
On another note:
I watched the politics show yesterday and heard Jim Spowart make very serious allegations against Jim Murphy.
One of the allegations centred around confidential business talks Spowart and Murphy had held on HBOS.
Spowart was incensed that Murphy had leaked details of these discussions to The Scotsman and said so on the programme.
Below is an extract from a now removed BBC web article:
Mr Spowart also said he was "annoyed and very unhappy" that, after being given an assurance from Mr Murphy about the fair treatment of alternative bids, he received a call about it three hours later from a journalist, adding: "These things in the commercial arena should be kept confidential."
Anyone notice the manipulation of words here?
The quotes make no mention of the much more serious charge that Murphy leaked details of the confidential discussion.
The call three hours later related to confidential details from just that private meeting !!
Why has it been airbrushed out of the news?
As far as I am aware, this story is no-where to be seen on any media outlets in Scotland.
Complain about this comment
#2 unknownunknowns
Calman's remit, to which Labour, the Tories and Libdems have all signed up to is this: "to continue to secure the position of Scotland within the United Kingdom."
We know what that means;
UK - Strong, Scotland - Weak
Britishness - Smart, Scottishess - Foolish
Westminster - the mother of all parliaments, Holyrood - a pretendy parliament.
Calman represents another attack on Scottish indentity, sic, "they had catcht hold of Scotland, they wou'd keep her fast".
Complain about this comment
#4 greenockboy
Welcome to the Scottish press, entire dictated from the Kremlin-on-the-clyde by Comrade McBroon and his trusty lieutenant J. Skeletor Murphy.
Complain about this comment
1. Minuend: "We know what Calman represents - it is just another attack on Scottish identity!"
LOL! These nationalists are craaaaaazy!
Complain about this comment
# 4 greenockboy
This what your looking for.
Financier 'discouraged' from bid
Complain about this comment
#7 Reluctant-Expat
Quote, Sir Kenneth Calman, Oct 2008, "the Barnett formula must be fairer to England."
English - Fair minded but hard-done-by people, Scots - Subsidy Junkies.
Calman represents another attack on Scottish indentity, sic, "Have we not bought the Scots, and a right to tax them?"
Complain about this comment
Brian
"Scotland - where spending is currently higher per head than in England?"
Actually, identifiable spending is higher currently, but we still won't have proper accounts for a while yet, and it's not clear how accurate they'll be.
It seems unwise to model anything in the public finances based on the last 20 years, when the UK (and London in particular) has been floating on the financial bubble which has now crashed.
A good article in the FT suggests that "the UK will at some point have to make a choice whether it wants to be in the eurozone or whether it wants to seek an alternative use for those rather tall buildings in the heart of London."
and that "the UK is in many respects comparable to Iceland. It is bigger of course, but still tiny in relation to the global economy, with a sick financial sector that accounts for several times gross domestic product."
The Brits need to question whether sticking to their "pretendy wee" currency, has any remaining point. The future lies with the European not the UK Union, and it is within the former that we need to define our relationships.
Complain about this comment
10. "....and that the UK is in many respects comparable to Iceland. It is bigger of course, but still tiny in relation to the global economy, with a sick financial sector that accounts for several times gross domestic product."
The financial sector is "several times" the UK's economy?
How does that work then?
(The truth is, of course, that the financial sector is about 4-5% of the UK's GDP, a slightly larger % than Germany and France. It is 10% of Scotland's economy)
And as for the Euro v Pound; Germany, the Eurozone's centrepiece economy, has just gone into full recession for the second time since 2003, having reported two consecutive periods of negative growth.
Furthermore, the entire Eurozone is now in recession.
The UK, outside the Euro, is still not officially in recession having only just reported the first period of negative growth. This will be the first recession in the UK since 1992.
Where is your evidence that the Euro would be better than staying in the Pound?
Salmond's sole argument is that "interest rates are lower there" (no consideration whatsoever of the euro economic cycle, unemployment, inflationary pressures etc.) which is astonishingly dimwitted for someone claiming to be an 'economist'.
Complain about this comment
Further to my #10
Citigroup job cull to hit 75,000
"Certainly [the job cuts] will fall particularly heavily on London and New York," Citigroup chairman Win Bischoff said at a business forum in Dubai.
Incidentally, does anyone know whether the public spending on the Olympics is to be allocated to the London regional figures - or allocated to the "whole UK" data?
Complain about this comment
#5 minuend:
The fact that Calman's remit is to strengthen Scotland within the Union isn't an insult to this country any more than it's an insult to England or Wales. I don't understand how it's an implicit attack on national identity.
Scotland is a part of the UK. We have an individual identity which we are deservedly proud of, and we share in the UK's collective identity. Neither is intrisincally better or worse than the other.
Complain about this comment
#10 oldnat
Don't point out the truth about the U.K!
The ever present arch-unionists will claim that it's not cricket or that everyone is wrong and they are right and hail Britannia.
In Broonland, Mugabignomics are the way forward? SPEND, TAX, PRINT and SPEND! Or have we not been eating our Credit Crunch cereal in the morning?
Complain about this comment
#11 Reluctant-to-admit-the-truth
I'm glad your still sticking to your unhealthy diet of Broon and Bust Sandwiches, however at risk of calling a spade a spade, shall I post a link to well known new article?
Why yes I shall!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7677436.stm
Just because they haven't reported the lies, statistics and bendy truths of the argument does not a recession not make.
I wonder if McBroon and Co. will simply allow themselves to artificially bring forward predicted growth in 5 years time into the current statistics so they can claim they are 'Getting on with the job, that people want us to get on with, the job, going forward, with the job'?
Pay McBroon today! Go McBust tommorrow!
Complain about this comment
12. You keep on spouting this inane nonsense.
London, Europe's richest region, currently produces a tax surplus of around 10-12bn a year, more than enough to pay the entire Olympic costs in one swoop. London pays far more in taxes alone than Scotland's entire non-oil GDP.
You nats keep on with your unproven claims that this doesn't include 'non-identifiable' expenditure yet fail to acknowledge that public sector staffing in London is roughly the same % of the population as Scotland, while public spending per head is LESS in London than in Scotland.
In summary, the nationalist argument is, and always has been, one giant flaw.
Complain about this comment
#13. unknownunknowns
Calman's remit is to 'secure' the position of Scotland within the UK. It makes no mention of 'strengthening'.
Sir Kenneth Calman has made in plain from the start, and has continued to say, that devolution has not been fair on England.
So what could 'secure' Scotland to make it 'fairer' for England?
The answer is not to strengthen Scottish identity but to weaken it and make it subservient.
Calman represents another attack on Scottish indentity, sic, "I ken, when we had a king, and a chancellor, and parliament - men o' our ain, we could aye peeble them wi' stones when they werena gude bairns - But naebody's nails can reach the length o' Lunnon".
Complain about this comment
#11 Reluctant-Expat
"How does that work then?"
You could try reading the article, that I linked to, and then to Professor Buiter's article.
You insist on quoting single point data, instead of trends, and select irrelevant ones at that.
The critical point is the extent to which the financial sector is exposed overseas in terms of its overall balance sheet. ONS stats from the end of 2007 show UK financial institutions "with gross foreign assets and liabilities of well over 400 percent of annual GDP does look like a highly leveraged entity - like an investment bank or a hedge fund." (Buister)
If you disagree with Buister's analysis, there are rather good contributions following his article, and you can post there.
You can always tell the good prof that he should be adding the UK's fiscal deficit to the EU's!
Complain about this comment
15. You're not all there, are you.
Complain about this comment
the calman commission is an establishment built stick,which will be used to beat back the advance of an evolving scottish parliament
with any hope it will be seen as the twig it is
Complain about this comment
#16 Reluctant-to-face-facts
Crumbs of the credit-crunch cereal!
News making item, City with twice population of country has higher GDP!
Shock and awe - Broon to Bust!
Complain about this comment
11 Reluctant Expat
The Financial Services sector is between 6% and 7% of the Scottish economy ie a lower percentage than it is to the UK economy.
Complain about this comment
#16 Reluctant-Expat
"unproven claims that this doesn't include 'non-identifiable' expenditure"
The UK Government reports carry the statement that 'non-identifiable' expenditure is not included in regional accounts.
The question about the Olympics was actually a technical one, but London is not providing all the public expenditure for the Olympics.
Once again you choose random unsourced statistics.
You are not a trustworthy source for any assertions on financial matters - no matter how much you bluster.
Complain about this comment
22. Who told you that? The SNP?
Complain about this comment
Re minuend:
Calman has a remit to look at the devolved settlement and see if change is required. It is rigth that this done in a calm and considered way.
If anyone else believes that some other form of settlement will benefit the Scottish people then it is up to them to make a positive case for it. It is not good enough to just rubbish other opinions.
Re old nat:
Your point is well made on the importance of the EU. However i don't necesserily agree with the simple anaylsis of the way forward.
It is a perfectly legitimate argument that further integration with the EU would be stronger as part of the UK. A positive argument for EU membership as an independant nation still has to be made.
It is an argument still to be made and won. The people of Scotland have consistently shown a reluctance towards full independance. I see little effort to change this.
Complain about this comment
16Reluctant Expat
Public spending per head in London is the highest in UK followed by public spending per head in N Ireland.
Scotland provides the second highest per head tax take in UK following the South East of England region
Complain about this comment
I don't know why my #18 has been referred.
It was an answer to #11 Reluctant-Expat's question
"How does that work then?"
My response was that he should read the original article and the embedded link to Professor Buister's argument.
The critical point is the extent to which the financial sector is exposed overseas in terms of its overall balance sheet. ONS stats from the end of 2007 show UK financial institutions with gross foreign assets and liabilities of well over 400 percent of annual GDP - justifying Buister's assertion that the UK financial sector is like an investment bank or a hedge fund.
Complain about this comment
Brian!
What we have had for a great number of years, both in the financial sector and within the Treasury have been off balance sheet figures that have been buried. This accounting method has been used to fiddle tax returns from all and sundry, and Whitehall have been complicit in all the action and inaction for years.
I have asked you and many more within the media to have surgically removed your rose coloured glasses before you fall, it can as big a hole as the McCrone Report and with big spikes at the bottom as many will see come the next General election.
Complain about this comment
Why are we giving any credence to the so-called, 'Calman Commission'? It is not a formal or legal Government generated thing.
It has said exactly what it's sponsors wanted it to say. Big surprise, all of them committed Unionists.
I don't care what it says. It is meaningless bunkum that has not even scratched the floor of PUBLIC opinion. Labour, Liberals and Tories, you really have to face the fact that you are in opposition and likely to remain so for at least the next 3 years.
Now to Jim Murphy. Why are we being treated to endless homilies and lectures from him? If I was Ian Gray I'd be most put out by being sidelined by this Brownite lackey. Actually he scares me. He appears to have a slightly crazed look that suggests he might stab anyone who disagreed with him.
Let's see what the National Conversation (STUPID name..why couldn't you have called it the **********Commission?) has to say. And there is the electorate, perhaps they might have something to say.
Complain about this comment
#8 cynicalHighlander offers a link to a BBC web based article and asks if it is what I'm looking for.
The answer is no.
I'm looking for specific articles on the serious charge that Murphy leaked confidential business info as Spowart alleged.
Complain about this comment
Well, in some sense devolution hasn't been fair on England! The answer, however, isn't to reduce Scotland's devolved powers but to increase them, and give England the same. As a civic nationalist, I'm sure you agree that the people of England deserve the same level of representation we have?
As far as I can see, you're simply making the blanket assertion that Scottish identity will be "made subservient". Why do you think this is so?
Your quote may have been accurate in Sir Walter Scott's time, but now our nails have been substantially lengthened. We can "peeble them wi' stones" at every election, and thanks to the modern media we can observe our elected, Scottish representatives (men and women of our own) taking part in the government of our country from Westminster to Holyrood to local councils.
I'm proud of my Scottish identity. It's survived 300 years in union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland - I don't think it's fragile enough to be swept away by the Calman Commission.
Complain about this comment
#29 crazyislander
"Why are we giving any credence to the so-called, 'Calman Commission'? It is not a formal or legal Government generated thing."
Unfortunately, it is. It was set up by the Scottish Parliament, at taxpayer's expense, to allow the Unionist parties to have their political research conducted at our expense!
Complain about this comment
Sorry, forgot to say that my previous comment was directed at #17 minuend.
Complain about this comment
Brian,
"litotes" and "Panglossian" . I'll be back after I get my dictionary!
Complain about this comment
#32 oldnat
EEK! Do you mean to tell me that I have had to pay for this mince?? I think I'll complain to the Accounts Commissioner coz it sure hasn't been value for money.
Complain about this comment
Re 29 crazyislander
What an arrogant bunch you nats really are. There has been a test of public opinion recently, at Glenrothes. You may have missed it. To summarise it wasn't a vindication of nationalism.
I notice the stream of lectures to the people of Glenrothes from the more fevered amongst you. Better to try to learn the lessons if you can.
The Scottish parliament is entitled to vote for a Calman commission if it wants, it is called democracy.
The national conversation has.....well not really taken off I suppose. Maybe most people are just not interested?
Complain about this comment
#35 crazyislander
We won't know the cost till it's all over - but with an SNP Government, at least we'll find out the real cost without the figures being massaged down.
Given the consultancy fees charged by the Universities by whom most of the experts are employed, it'll probably cost as much as a new Wick High School!
Won't northhighlander be pleased?
Complain about this comment
Talking about various ways of taxing the populace is all very well. However, it avoids the main issue. The primary purpose of taxation is to raise funds to do things that are better done by society - building and maintaining roads, hospitals and schools for instance. It does not really matter how those funds are raised, so long as Adam Smith's Canons are observed. I saw over the weekend that there is talk in the submission of a US-style sales tax for Scotland. How this can work alongside VAT is beyond me. Consider the alternatives:
(a) Sales tax is in addition to VAT at current rates. The results should be obvious to anyone with more than one brain cell.
Or
(b) VAT is adjusted so that the amount paid at the till is, broadly, the same. That sounds fine until you consider the realities. Would the EU approve this? Given its desire for Customs harmonization, I doubt it. Even if it did, would Scottish companies find it more difficult to trade with the EU? I suspect so. The costs of trying to administer two taxes would add additional burdens to Scottish businesses. Because US-style sales tax is not a value-added tax, there would be, effectively, customs duties on Scottish exports.
So, unless the Scottish Parliament has control over a variety of revenue-raising tools, all we would have is a block grant from the UK Treasury. Calling it VAT receipts or Sales Tax receipts does not change the truth. Shouldn't the Calman Commission be spending time on bona fide constitutional arrangements, rather than fussding over which pocket Scotland's pocket money is going to come out of?
Complain about this comment
#11 Reluctant-Expat
What is this man Brown talking about getting the G20 to agree his plan to stave off world recession. RE has told us we are not in recession; Brown is obviously just scaremongering like the tory twit talking down the pound.
If there's no recession how about buying Brown a robot dog for Christma?. It rolls over and obeys your commands and is a lot cheaper than a Calman Commission or a Labour MP at Westminster.
#35 crazyislander
No,no! The English paid; our pretendy wee Parliament frittered it away.
Complain about this comment
#25 northhighlander
My view on the structure of political systems has a simple basis -
The world has moved on, in the 48 years that I've been interested in politics, and the UK is simply too wee for the "big things". Hence, my concern about the "Little Britainers" who cling to a past age when sterling was a major reserve currency, and the UK was a big player on the world stage.
They prevent us from the full benefits of being part of a larger Union (and yes there are a number of ways in which the EU needs to be improved).
Obviously, you are right. A majority of Scots don't currently support independence (but I'm old enough to remember when a majority didn't support a Scottish Parliament either).
The question of Scotland's relations with the rest of the UK would, however, have a different dynamic were the UK more supportive of Europe.
Complain about this comment
Re 37 Old nat
Your faith in the SNP to not play politics with the cost of the Calman report is touching.
Massaging of figures can go up as well as down, I would contend.
As to the new Wick High School, It would cost less than removing tolls of the Forth Bridge, less than the removal of parking charges for a few hospitals, less than the cost of MSP's, less than the cost of many things the government has decided to commit resources to.
So my point remains good, why would the Highlands want to replace domination from Westminster with domination from Edinburgh?
Complain about this comment
Brian
Have you found an explanation as to why a "Government source" was apparently able to brief on the contents of the supposedly independent "expert panel" set up by Calman?
If the party in power at Westminster had been given a copy, did the party in power at Holyrood get a copy as well?
If not, why not?
When will those of us who paid for it get to see it?
You have some digging to do.
Complain about this comment
#32, 'oldnat'
That's one of the inevitable costs of a multi-party democracy, along with minority governments and the representation of a wider range of views. I'm of the opinion that, so far at least, the benefits have outweighed the costs.
#16, 'Reluctant Expat'
And this year London, Europe's richest region, has needed to be bailed out with 56Bn of tax-payers money, neatly wiping out its tax take for most of this century in one fell swoop. OK, yes, some of those losses were incurred in Bradford, Bingley, Halifax, and, let's admit it, Edinburgh. But seeing the profits made in Bradford, Bingley, Halifax, and, let's admit it, Edinburgh are claimed by London in the good years, it seems fair that London should also be accounted as having incurred our losses in the bad years.
In any case, as someone else has ably pointed out, London has four times the population of Scotland. It would be something of a shame if it did not have a greater tax take. But this is not - repeat, not - a good year to compare London's supposed economic strength with anywhere this side of Rekjavik.
As a final comment to both of you gentlemen, hiding behind pseudonyms does neither of you any favours.
Complain about this comment
41. northhighlander
So the sick and their relatives pay for your school I wouldn't think that would be what the majority of Scots would wish for.
Complain about this comment
#41 northhighlander
Actually, it's much more difficult to inflate a budget line than to reduce it.
Costs included in a budget line need to have an audit trail to justify them.
It's very easy to dump some actual costs into a generalised budget line - and there are many such lines within Government.
Hence, my belief that in this unusual circumstance of Parliament over-ruling the Government, the actual costs for the Scottish taxpayer will emerge.
I'm not suggesting for a moment that the SNP is somehow "more honest" than any other party. Simply that the reality of public accounting procedures means that they can't add on invented costs.
The UK Government, however, will doubtless argue that the costs of their submission to Calman can't be disentangled from overall Civil Service costs . The cost to the UK taxpayer, therefore, is unlikely to emerge.
Complain about this comment
Read Brians comments and saw him on Reporting "Scotland"
What we must remember is that Brian is a product of the Ultra Unionist BBC and therefore presents the Unionist point of view. The BBC commentators , Kirsty Wark , Douglas Fraser, Glen Campbell (especially Glen Campbell) do likewise.
With regard to the Calman Comm does anybody expect anything different. Post Glenrothes the Great Broon and his creature Murphy believe that they can get away with anything and of course they will ........For a time.
Complain about this comment
#43 Simon_Brooke
My objection to Calman is not that Parliament over-ruled the Government, but that it's purpose was party political. A commission that examined all options would have been a valid use of public funds.
The pseudonym is there for a single purpose. It is unwise to advertise political beliefs, when bidding for contracts.
When I finally retire, I'll become "my_name aka oldnat" - but not till then.
Complain about this comment
12. At 3:23pm on 17 Nov 2008, oldnat
Olympic cost breakdown
Central government - £5.975bn
National Lottery - £2.175bn
Greater London Authority - £925m
London Development Agency - £250m
Total - £9.325bn
Complain about this comment
Re 44
Hospital carparking should be free for all not just a few. The current proposal is mince it was all about headlines and nothing to do with fairness.
My point lost as usual on rabid nats is that it is all about choices. An alternative is why are children in the highlands less entitled to a decent education than those elsewhere?
Or do you have to vote SNP to get a share of the spoils?
Complain about this comment
#16 'Reluctant Expat'
" London pays far more in taxes alone than Scotland's entire non-oil GDP."
Why non-oil GDP? Why do we have to pretend that oil doesn't exist? It's there, so why all the hypothetical situations?
We don't see people arguing about non-whisky GDP. You don't talk about London's non-financial GDP.
In the Nationalist argument oil isn't that important, it's going to run out soon etc etc.
So why do you do that?
Complain about this comment
Brian - comparing the constitutional convention with the calman commission is like comparing an apple with a banana.they have very little in common.
before they even give us their interim report.you can tell that the people who "serve" on this commission and the people actually allowed to give their opinion to the commission must be the only ones in the country that think that the status quo is acceptable (well they were hand picked) the fact that they want to take powers away from the Scottish Parliament , that they lost power in, and give the power to health boards ,that are jam packed full of labour councillors and labour place men & woman says it all . we don't all zip up the back! next they will be suggesting that the Scottish Parliament hand powers back to north Lanarkshire council. now there is a fine group of people who can always be relied on to toe the party line come hell or high water.
next they will be telling us the recession is not GB's fault, if they say it often enough people might actually believe it.
Complain about this comment
#48 cynicalHighlander
Thanks for the link. London is paying for 12.5% of the publicly funded cost.
My question, however, was how is this 9.325 bn GBP going to be entered in the regional accounts. I suspect that no one knows yet.
Complain about this comment
GMB and Unite, have voted against a pay deal
The world economy is in meltdown, thousands are about to move from pay to no-pay.
Unison have accepted the deal.
The decision of the other unions seems to more appropriate to the world of the Pimploids (certainly not this planet).
Complain about this comment
38. At 6:26pm on 17 Nov 2008, Skip_NC:
I think EU law is the reason why we must have VAT. To bring in another tax would be poltical suicide.
Not only that, it could destroy the economy. England is not that far to travel, and popping over to Carlisle would probably be cost effective.
Brian has a valid point about nuclear power. There is a lot of talk about investing in green technologies - which I am all in favour for - but at the moment nothing much is happening. It cannot at this moment be ignored. What if there is a crisis which disrupts gas and oil supplies? What will you do? Open a coal mine? Oops, no we can't since that is not "green".
I've not read the Calman report. But I won't bother either since both sides will support / criticise it regardless. But finance has to be important. HBOS/Lloyds is almost certainly going to go ahead. And what was the alternive (that has come to nothing) - The Bank of China! So much for an independent Scottish bank. I think the matter has to be dropped, however distasteful some people find it. Why should shareholders come before customers?
1. At 12:57pm on 17 Nov 2008, minuend wrote:
"We know what Calman represents - it is just another attack on Scottish identity."
Oh come on. What is this with anything done at Westminister is an attack to wipe out Scotland? Try finding some middle ground. There are people in the UK who could quite rightly argue that the SNP are trying to wipe out the UK identity.
Complain about this comment
#49 northhighlander
NHS car parking charges abolished except in those built using PFI your favoured way of funding I believe. Nothing to do with the current administration try the last lot.
Both my children went to small OLD rural primary schools and went to uni, nice shiny buildings don't improve childrens ability or well being.
Chips on shoulder comes to mind
Complain about this comment
#54 Neil_Small147
Wave energy yet another green one. I did ask North highlander this one "what are the benefits of nuclear power" I am still in the dark maybe you are able to show me the light!
Complain about this comment
Newsnicht
Labour/Tory want a consensus?
Lib-Dems going their own way?
I find the LabouraTory version of UK Unionism and their continuing doubts about altering Barnett rather odd.
Let's assume (for the sake of argument) that Barnett gives us "more than we're entitled to" on GDP/needs assessment or any other basis.
How can UK Unionists argue that it is equitable for one part of their Union to have an unfair benefit at other's expense?
Complain about this comment
#41 - Because, like it or not, there is a distinct Scottish demos which wishes to do many things differently from England. And last time I checked the inhabitants of the Highlands were part of that demos. (I was born in Inverness and I certainly am.)
Would you rather become English?
And on the substantive point of this article, has anyone noticed that this mysterious report from Calman has gone missing? And no-one even seems to be reporting that it is late. Do they think we won't notice!?
Complain about this comment
For the historians of the future, studying the process that eventually led to Scotland recovering her national independence, the Calman Circus will be regarded as little more than a transparant unionist ploy.
Calman represents an attempt to control and limit popular demands for increased Scottish autonomy by keeping the debate within unionist parameters. It also seeks to isolate the SNP by removing the independence option from the debate whilst delivering the appearance of change.
Although the unionist media has high hopes for Calman it is doomed to failure for two reasons. i) Any meaningful steps towards fiscal autonomy will not be tolerated by Westminster as they will be seen as dangerous steps towards full independence. ii) Devolution (in the context of recession) will continue to prize apart the UK on a political level as English voters demand cuts in spending north of the border and Scots look to their own parliament to protect their interests.
Complain about this comment
Post 59 sums up the whole venture entirely.
You really are a dyed in the wool Unionist aren't you Brian. I felt quite sick when reading you calling this facade "Productive".
Why not treat the Scots like grown ups and give them fiscal autonomy? Of course because Wesminster wants control of oil. Perish the thought for them that a confident and rich Scotland may emerge from the ashes.
It's demeaning as a nation and as a people to be treated in such a way. And by those who purport to represent you and come from your communities and country as well.
Calman and the ensuing debate over barnett is an excuse to squeeze Scotland even more to appease an English electorate bred on the subsidy junkie lie. There's a perverse irony that Scottish fiscal autonomy would be more popular with a majority of English voters than with Scottish Labour MPs.
Complain about this comment
58. "Because, like it or not, there is a distinct Scottish demos which wishes to do many things differently from England."
Actually, no there isn't.
Scan through recent social issue polls (start with YouGov) and you'll see that all parts of the UK are in close agreement on MANY issues. And this includes Trident, nuclear power and even the Iraq War.
I did provide a few dozen examples some weeks back but I can't see it in my 'archive' anymore (don't they show ALL posts?).
Complain about this comment
# 49
'An alternative is why are children in the highlands less entitled to a decent education than those elsewhere?'
I was totally unaware that the Highlands had poor quality teachers in comparison with the rest of the country.
Perhaps the local councils should up the teaching standards.
Complain about this comment
Scots have had enough of seeing their country fall into relative decline whilst waiting around hoping English people and England will change. But they and it won't so we're off basically.
Complain about this comment
Might I suggest that we all stop reacting to silly posts from Reluctant Expat.
These are invariably inaccurate and made up of unsubstantiated assertions which are designed only to irritate.
By responding we only encourage more of the same.
Complain about this comment
This comment is awaiting moderation. Explain.
#64 sneckedagain
I agree! His latest shall no doubt illustrate your assertion.
Complain about this comment
The nationalists are shooting themselves in the foot with all this Sarah Palinesque rhetoric. Most Scottish people aren't interested in independence or nationalism, but want more fiscal powers for the Scottish Parliament. This report delivers that, albeit cautiously.
Complain about this comment
You can't say for sure that Scots don't want independence as they have never been asked.
Why should any fiscal powers be handed over "cautiously"? Why are Scots ripe to be treated in such an infantile way and why do you Anaxim as a Scot presumably not object to this?
Complain about this comment
Simon_Brooke #43 wrote this absurdity:
"In any case, as someone else has ably pointed out, London has four times the population of Scotland."
In round figures the population of Scotland is 5 million.
The population of London is 7 million.
Four times the population?? And not one of the posters thought to challenge this obvious gross exageration. Is there any wonder that many Scots don't trust the statistics and arguments presented as facts by the pro-independence lobby? It does the cause no good you know . . . . .
Complain about this comment
The report from Muscatelli is on the Herriot-Watt website.
There is a link to it here on the Calman site.
Complain about this comment
My post 65 is stuck in pre-mod purgatory so I'll repeat it here:
64. Feel free to prove me wrong, sneckedagain.
I look forward to reading about the broad range of social issues where we have distinctly different attitudes to the rest of the UK.
Furthermore....
68. Give that silly nationalist rhetoric of us 'being treated like children' a rest. Much like most other nationalist claims, it is nonsensical and irrelevant.
The UK's centralist economic management model has seen us outperform most of our competitors in past decades. It makes a great deal of sense to not make radical changes to that model too quickly.
69. I was waiting for a nat to challenge that......but not one stepped forward, almost certainly because the truth devastates their bizarre claim that we somehow subsidise Europe's richest region.
Complain about this comment
56. At 11:14pm on 17 Nov 2008, cynicalHighlander wrote:
#54 Neil_Small147
Wave energy yet another green one. I did ask North highlander this one "what are the benefits of nuclear power" I am still in the dark maybe you are able to show me the light!
---------------------
Benefits: constant source of power.
Disadvantages (just to show I'm not stupid): problems with disposal and decommissioning. Reliance on overseas sources for fuel. Construction cost.
However, wave power is not yet set up in Scotland or the UK in an approriate volume.
I'm not against green energy at all. But we need a CONSTANT source of power. Wind power cannot deliver this, regardless how windy we are in Scotland. Hydro power is limited from what I gather.
One of the main problems facing green technologies is the NIMBY factor. In addition conservationists don't like wind turbines (kills birds); tidal barrages (silts up and destroys sea life).
The Westminister and Scottish governments should be doing more to get homes and workplaces insulated. This alone could make a huge saving on energy costs and pollution.
Complain about this comment
#69 MalcolmW2
While "4 times" is certainly an exaggeration, in economic terms, it makes more sense to thin of "London", not in terms of Boris's fiefdom of 7.5 million, but rather the London metropolitan area which has around 13 million.
Complain about this comment
Outperformed in what way? Only the the SE of England has a GDP per head comparable with the rest of the EU. On many many other economic indicators Scotland hasn't performed nearly as well as other countries as is all too obvious if you actually spend time in some of these countries. So either Scots are stupid or mismanaged. I say mismanaged. What do you say?
As for Scots being treated like children. This is entirely accurate. Squabbles over how much pocket money Scotland gets or how trusted to do things Scotland is is as an analogy perfect in terms of illuminating our relationship with Westminster.
Complain about this comment
#71, what a load of garbage reluctant-expat writes at times regarding; subsidising (in his own words) "Europes' richest region"...
How about with no real natural resources, huge overcrowding problems you ask yourself where all the money located in central London is being generated from?
Do you think they grow it on trees or something? Have they a magic money wand? Does it just happen to flow along the banks of the Thames waiting to be fished out?
I think you have just spectacularly defeated your own argument there ex-pat.
Complain about this comment
73. And this is relevant to what and how?
Still waiting for some hint of a snippet of a whiff of any kind of evidence that we subsidise Europe's richest region.....
(Is this really all the nationalists have left in the form of an 'economic argument for independence'?)
Complain about this comment
The SE of England isn't Europe's richest region. Where do you get such nonsense?
Complain about this comment
I've now had a quick skim through the Muscatelli Report.
Given the constraints of its remit, it comes across as a valuable piece of research, without the political bias I had feared might intrude.
Its concentration on the need to balance the issues of equity and accountability, and the consequent need for horizontal/vertical redistribution systems is welcome.
The descriptions of other systems is useful, not just because it draws a lot of disparate research into one document, but because it ponts out that each country's systems were designed as part of their own unique political dynamic.
It's weaknesses seem to be the result of its constraints - for example its analysis of "what the public thinks" is entirely UK-centric. No attempt is made to widen the analysis to the European dimension, nor is there any analysis of the role of the EU in setting common standards of policy, or in fiscal redistribution.
Consequently, it over emphasis the current role of the UK state.
Complain about this comment
Oldnat,
STILL waiting for some hint of a snippet of a whiff of a glimpse of your evidence that we subsidise London.
You are very sure about this so I assume you have lots and lots to share with us.
Sneckedagain,
Still waiting for your list of all the social issues where we have distinctly different attitudes compared to the rest of the UK.
Complain about this comment
#67 Anaxim
"Most Scottish people aren't interested in independence or nationalism, but want more fiscal powers for the Scottish Parliament. This report delivers that, albeit cautiously."
I think the case for independence would be made or broken with the advent of financial autonomy for Scotland, therefore I see it as a necessary progression to finally put the issue to rest.
I can only hope that you're correct that the report delivers the much needed greater fiscal powers for the Scottish parliament, as all that has been discussed before now is assigned revenues. This would not be provide the greater fiscal powers sa promised, but a block grant with a different name.
RE: care to comment on how 'our' economy compares with the rest of the UK's, and has been pointed out with and without oil GDP? 'We' would like to know. Think I gave you the Scottish government's figures for those some time ago.
Complain about this comment
#68
"Why should any fiscal powers be handed over "cautiously"? Why are Scots ripe to be treated in such an infantile way and why do you Anaxim as a Scot presumably not object to this?"
Change is usually better when its gradual.
I don't object to it 'as a Scot', since I don't follow the path of identity politics.
Complain about this comment
#54. Neil Small
The point about Nuclear power is that we don't need it. Scotland is a net exporter of electricity and was so even when both its nuclear power stations were out of commission. In practice we export the whole production of Torness - none of its electricity is used in Scotland - and we would export the whole of the production of Hunterston if
Scotland isn't short of power, and Scotland isn't going to be short of power. So the whole 'ooh scarey the lights might go out' nonsense simply doesn't apply in Scotland.
England, of course, does have a major generation shortage in the next few decades - but the reason we're not going ahead with big wind farms in the Western Isles is that it actually isn't very efficient to transmit electricity long distances. If England needs more nuclear power (which arguably it does) then I can think of a jolly good place to build that nuclear power capacity.
In Scotland, it's a radioactive red herring. Mind you, given the amount of radioactive pollution in our coastal waters already there'd be a good argument for Scotland joining Ireland and Norway in campaigning against further nuclear power in England.
Nuclear power is not 'green' by any stretch of the imagination.
Complain about this comment
#54. Neil Small
The point about Nuclear power is that we don't need it. Scotland is a net exporter of electricity and was so even when both its nuclear power stations were out of commission. In practice we export the whole production of Torness - none of its electricity is used in Scotland - and we would export the whole of the production of Hunterston if it actually worked, and there was sufficient capacity on the interconnectors.
Scotland isn't short of power, and Scotland isn't going to be short of power. So the whole 'ooh scarey the lights might go out' nonsense simply doesn't apply in Scotland.
England, of course, does have a major generation shortage in the next few decades - but the reason we're not going ahead with big wind farms in the Western Isles is that it actually isn't very efficient to transmit electricity long distances. If England needs more nuclear power (which arguably it does) then I can think of a jolly good place to build that nuclear power capacity.
In Scotland, it's a radioactive red herring. Mind you, given the amount of radioactive pollution in our coastal waters already there'd be a good argument for Scotland joining Ireland and Norway in campaigning against further nuclear power in England.
Nuclear power is not 'green' by any stretch of the imagination.
Complain about this comment
80. Happy to. We are the 4th richest 'region' in the UK with growth of the past years only topped by the E, SE and London regions.
I don't see the point of including the oil as it is fast running out, plus its extremely volatile pricing makes any inclusive planning and forecasting impossible and totally unreliable.
I am happy to accept the GERS accounts as there is no reliable evidence around that shows it is wildly inaccurate (I have repeatedly asked for those who claim it is to provide some evidence....but nothing has been forthcoming).
GERS figures are also consistent with other sets of national and regional accounts which only goes to substantiate their accuracy.
Complain about this comment
#79 Reluctant-Expat
Don't be silly. Not a claim I made.
I did question the use of some stats.
I now note from the Muscatelli project that the Olympics has been defined as being for the benefit of the whole UK, and hence this public spending will not be "identifiable expenditure" in the regional public spend data.
Complain about this comment
85. Glad you are rejecting the claim that Scotland somehow subsidises London.
We ARE making progress.
However, it's a shame you are still refusing to accept that London runs a multi-billion annual tax surplus that is distributed around the country....unless you can prove otherwise?
Complain about this comment
72. Neil_Small147
'Benefits: constant source of power.'
Only in the very short term ie 2 decades then we go downhill on a steeper incline than we are already sliding.
It's a pretty weak justification, in my opinion, to saddle future generations with the ongoing clean up bill . Mankind has to wean himself of the mindset of the 'must have it' syndrome because the planet cannot survive as we know it under those terms.
Complain about this comment
#86 Reluctant-Expat
Glad that you've stopped beating your wife!
Misrepresenting what others say is a cheap trick - hence totally in line with your normal style.
Complain about this comment
#84 RE
"I don't see the point of including the oil as it is fast running out, plus its extremely volatile pricing makes any inclusive planning and forecasting impossible and totally unreliable"
Your most probably correct as regards the future inclusion of oil in Scotland's GDP, but I thought we're talking about past figures here, so there I would see the point in including those figures.
Also, the government stats showed that Scotland's GDP lagged behind the UK's (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Economy/TrendLongerGDP) and other selected small EU countries (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Economy/TrendGDPEU) over the years.
The figures for the first quarter of this year:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Economy/TrendLatestGDP
The figures for thesecond quarter:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Economy/GDP/Findings
2008 Third quarters will be available on 28th January.
Complain about this comment
Reluctant-Expat:
#82.
If we are looking at regions within the United Kingdom then shall we look at the North East of Scotland.
If the North East of Scotland (including Shetland etc) were seperate from the United Kingdom then the Oil Reserves would be ours (coming from a North East man).
Is it safe to say that the North East of Scotland, with all our natural resources, along with some of the lowest unemployment rates etc in the United Kingdom we also send a surplus to the Treasury that is then re-distrubuted?
By the way since London generates her income through the financial markets, is it not safe to say that London has been the real city to benefit from the Governments assitance towards the financial markets?
I see you are dodging Oldnats points. And you say I have no credibility! At least I can raise and answer questions instead of ignoring the people around me. But I guess thats how you British Nats play. Ignore the facts and go against everything not British...
Complain about this comment
87. An average nuclear power station uses approx a small shipping container-worth of fuel each year. Over a 30 year lifespan, such a power station will barely have enough of those containers to cover half a football pitch. Therefore volume is clearly not an issue.
Methods for safe nuclear storage have improved considerably since the start of nuclear power, and will no doubt continue to improve.
There are vast tracts of uninhabited and otherwise useless land around the world that could be used for secure nuclear storage, with monitoring and surveillance technology available now to maintain that security.
We are a fast-growing power hungry nation and short of utilising every hilltop, valley and ocean coastline, there is insufficient generating capacity to provide the crucial baseload we would require.
Nuclear power may not be pretty, or even politically fashionable, but people with more knowledge on this matter than us consider it an unavoidable necessity.
Salmond's independence strategy is to argue against everything the UK Govt says and does. As with his argument for joining the Euro, his ever-changing arcs of prosperity and his oil-funded economic powerhouse theory (among others), his anti-nuclear stance does not stand up to scrutiny.
Complain about this comment
Oil isn't fast running out and we as Scots have a right to have it included in any consideration of either what we've paid or what we owe.
Scotland quite obviously does subsidise London because Scotland has in reality run a surplus every year for the last thirty odd.
London or rather Westminster is something of a magician in these things. It manages to hide two things simultaneously; Scotland's real contribution to the national exchequer and also just how much it receives in 'hidden' subsidies including Govt depts and those deemed as essential infrastructural payments which if they took place anywhere else in the country would register as subisdies.
So you've stopped claiming the SE is the richest region in the EU. Good because that's a nonsense. The SE is just about as rich per head as Belgium and is far surpassed by both major and minor competitors in the EU. And if you take median salaries for the whole UK we are to a shocking extent even further behind comparable countries.
Complain about this comment
You're being disingenuous anaxim. You know as well as I do that there are deeply cynical reasons that a gradualist approach has been used to Scotland. Tell me, if your boss gave you your monthly wages in gradualist fashion would you be happy that he was being so "cautious"?
What do you mean by identity politics? We are all a product of identity politics which is why your Scottish postcode for example ensures you a different return on your money to someone with an English one.
Complain about this comment
84
The most recent GERS accounts established firmly that there is no significant subsidy to Scotland. The real significance of them was that ,as they were the first GERS figures presented during the first SNP regime they were (surprise, surprise) very much more accurate than hithertoo. Normally we got GERS figues which headlined a Scotish subsidy and then over the next period we got that suggestion demolished by serious analysts - but that was never headlined.
Serious students can get all the facts from Jim and Margaret Cuthbert's incisive studies of sucessive GERS productions which are available on their web site. The Cuthberts were Government economic analysts.
And it is alawys worth remembering that the GERS figures tell us absolutely nothing about the likely economic performance of an independent Scotland.
Complain about this comment
89. Allow me to tear that ridiculous graph apart again.
Take a look at the EU countries included in the SNP's 'sample': Austria, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Portugal and Sweden.
Only TWO of those have really grown more than the UK; Ireland and Luxembourg. Ireland managed it 40 years of billions upon billions in EU aid. And Luxembourg? Similar population to Iceland but for some reason the latter is suddenly "too small to be relevant" according to Shrek.
Remove those two factors and see how the graph compares then. And how come Belgium and Netherlands aren't included? Anything to do with their growth being too low?
And where is the graph showing Scotland's growth compared each individual region, instead of just a UK average which is heavily slanted by the strong economies of London and the SE. Take them out and see how Scotland compares.
In summary: Both graphs are just more examples of the SNP's biased sampling of preferred factors solely directed towards providing some sort of pro-independence economic argument.
Yet more examples of the SNP talking Scotland's achievements down, making Scotland look like a failure, solely to suit their own selfish ideological goals.
Complain about this comment
Who cares about economic growth levels when many millions of Scots and English people are never going to benefit from it in comparison to their continental counterparts.
Complain about this comment
#95 when it comes to talking Scotland and Scots down you are a not so reluctant expert.
Complain about this comment
#95 Reluctant-Expat
"Allow me to tear that ridiculous graph apart again."
So you are also an expert statistician! (these aren't a political party's data, but those compiled by professional statisticians working to common standards with others in the UK)
Somehow I don't think a decent statistician would previously have argued that one calculated the Scottish fiscal deficit by adding the GERS calculated deficit to Scotland's share of the UK deficit.
Now, I wonder who could that have been?
Complain about this comment
#91, nuclear power produces tons and tons of waste each year, from used gloves and overalls to air conditioning filters to cleaning materials. If reluctant-expat thinks that it is just the fuel, then it shows just what s/he knows.
These low grade waste items are encased in barrels (In another facility which also produces it's own waste) and have to also be stored for thousands of years.
Wake up ex-pat... NUCLEAR IS EXTREMELY DIRTY!!! FACT!
As for the South East, it is subsidised in the main by UK companies basing their HQ's in London. That results in the tax being calculated as belonging to the SE. It is not as simple as one area subsidising the other, but it is fair to say that London has always done and continues to do very well out of the Union... the same is not so evident in Scotland.
Complain about this comment
moving back to the commission -
independence has never been on the agenda for the labour party, and now that devolution max or full fiscal autonomy is not on the agenda the question must be -
How long till the labour party attempt to shut down the Scottish Parliament ,again, because they are not doing as Westminster wants them to.
Complain about this comment
98. Wrong again, oldnat. Predictably.
The SNP has full editorial control over the SG website (I know this for a fact from my Holyrood buddy and it's plain to see by anyone who can manage to be objective for more than a few seconds at a time). Did you actually believe otherwise?!
Maybe you would like to come up with a graph that compares Scotland with individual countries, instead of with an average based on a preferred selection as the SNP repeatedly does?
Weren't you the one who repeatedly claimed that Scotland subsidises London.....but then spectacularly failed to provide any evidence to back your claim up once challenged?
Do you STILL claim Scotland subsidises London? And, if so, would you like to provide any evidence now?
Complain about this comment
99. Bongo_1:"As for the South East, it is subsidised in the main by UK companies basing their HQ's in London."
I assume YOU have some evidence to back this up? Any chance you could share it with us?
What are the odds that no evidence will EVER be presented as I have asked this same question of several nats many times...ALL without response.
I am more than a little chuffed that this latest pro-independence flicker has now been snuffed out and Scotland can return to living in the 21st Century instead of the 12th.
Complain about this comment
#95 RE
So you'll accept the GERS accounts but not these statisitics? Why are you being so selective, because it disagrees with your view point?
Your 'dismantling' of the graphs is impressive, but I'll leave it up to others to choose if Ireland and Luxembourg qualify or should in fact be discounted because they don't meet your criteria for a relevant country in this context. It also explains why each of these countries were chosen on the website.
"And where is the graph showing Scotland's growth compared each individual region, instead of just a UK average which is heavily slanted by the strong economies of London and the SE. Take them out and see how Scotland compares."
So instead of you constantly going on about the UK's GDP in reference to Scotland's economy when comparing with other EU countries GDP, you now wish the Scottish government to compare itself with other UK 'regions' instead of the UK as a whole?
Why is this relevant in the context of Scotland as a nation instead of a region in the UK, therefore the comparison of Scotland's economy with the rest of the UK nation is of greater relevance. If the ONS has statistics for other UK regions GDP you can compare the figures for yourself. Personally I'm more interested how our economy fared as a nation compared to other EU nations and the rest of the UK, which has greater relevance in the case for or against independence and also fiscal autonomy.
Complain about this comment
103. It's all about comparing like with like. Comparing individual nations and individual regions, NOT bundles of preferred selections.
"Personally I'm more interested how our economy fared as a nation compared to other EU nations and the rest of the UK, which has greater relevance in the case for or against independence and also fiscal autonomy."
I completely agree. So why don't the SNP provide such comparisons on their SG website?
Scotland has become the UK's 4th wealthiest 'region' of the UK and one of its fastest growing....where is that mentioned in your links or indeed anywhere on the SNP-controlled SG site?
Complain about this comment
I note the Scottish Finance Secretary pointing out in an article in today's Express that the latest GERS report showed Scotland with an £800 million surplus last year.
Perhaps this is a lie.
Complain about this comment
105. That '800m surplus' only exists if you discount 3-4bn in capital spending.
Read the GERS accounts and see for yourself:
In 2006-07, the estimated current budget balance for the public sector in Scotland was a surplus of £0.8 billion when including an estimated geographical share of North Sea revenue.
In 2006-07, the estimated current budget balance plus estimated net capital investment, was a deficit of £2.7 billion when including an estimated geographical share of North Sea revenue.
It's not a lie, it's yet MORE selective quoting by the SNP.
Complain about this comment
26. Sneckedagain.
And you are basing this particular pile of tosh on.....what?
Complain about this comment
#104
Alrgiht Confuscias, you were the one continually comparing the UK's GDP against EU countries to demonstrate how well Scotland was doing, instead of comparing the Scottish GDP. Now you've changed your tune to comparing regions. I'm not interested in how Scotland compares to a selected UK region, I am interested how my countries economy matches up to the rest of the UK and also to other similar countries (economically) to Scotland.
"where is that mentioned in your links or indeed anywhere on the SNP-controlled SG site" Shock horror, surprised you haven't used your favourite C'word for that one yet.
Complain about this comment
Having asked many nationalists on countless occasions, without a single response, can I now safely assume that;
a) There is no evidence to prove that Scotland subsidises London,
b) There is no evidence to show that Scots have different social attitudes to the rest of the UK and
c) There is no evidence to show that Corporation Tax is somehow included when calculating regional GVA/GDP figures.
Nationalist beliefs are so incredibly fragile, aren't they.
108. Quite simple:
Compare Scotland with individual entities, be they individual EU nations or individual UK regions.
Do NOT compare Scotland with an average of a bundle of entities, especially a cherry-picked bundle.
Q. Where is such a comparison available on the SNP-controlled SG website?
Complain about this comment
109. "Compare Scotland with individual entities, be they individual EU nations or individual UK regions.
Do NOT compare Scotland with an average of a bundle of entities, especially a cherry-picked bundle.
Q. Where is such a comparison available on the SNP-controlled SG website?"
Nothing? Really? Not one graph or chart on the SNP-controlled SG website comparing Scotland to individual UK regions or to individual EU nations?
Mmm.
Complain about this comment
#110 RE
When exactly were the UK 'regions' established by the UK government? Think you'll find the Scottish/UK comparison has data which pre-dates this.
Explain why comparing Scotland's GDP with another UK region is relevant?
I guess the government neglected to consider you're criteria, including previous administrations, to make theses statistics 'valid' in your eyes. Perhaps others have a different opinion? Is that allowed?
Come on conspiracy boy, show me the ONS stats for the UK region GDP, and the EU countries, then you can tell me how the Scottish, NOT the UK GDP compares. You persisited for long enough presenting the UK's GDP as Scotland's when deriding all those other small countries. Lers see if you can work out the difference now?
Oh no, those nasty nats are at again, conjourig up their own conspiracies, who will save us? RE and GB to the rescue........?
Complain about this comment
111. All these nationalist claims that Scotland has been held back by the big nasty union........and you have no proof to back any of them up?
Surely not! I have never seen nationalists failing to back up their claims ever before....oh wait.....
And to say Scotland is better than other nations is now "deriding" the other nations?
If someone says Scotland does worse than other countries, they are deriding Scotland.
If someone says Scotland does better, they are now deriding the other countries.
You are so pathetically desperate to be annoyed at anything you can find, aren't you.
No wonder the independence campaign failed AGAIN. You lot are a joke.
Complain about this comment
#109 Reluctant-Expat
You're quite right that reliable evidence is lacking on the breakdown of any regional statistics published by Westmidden.
Why do you think that successive unionist governments have resisted all attempts to make HM Treasury less opaque?
Complain about this comment
#101 Reluctant-Expat
"I know this for a fact from my Holyrood buddy"
I love your use of reliable sources!
Clearly s/he disagrees with the IEG Report to Calman on GERS "the “National Statistics” classification of the data means that these data have not been subject to political interference."
"Weren't you the one who repeatedly claimed that Scotland subsidises London?"
No. You are confusing me with someone else.
Re your other postings on UK regions.
"Scotland is the only part of the UK for which complete fiscal flows are calculated on a regular basis." (IEG report p24).
"Defence expenditure is also allocated on a per capita basis, although on a “cash-flow” basis, its distribution would be skewed towards the South of England. In 1996-97, Scotland only accounted for 2.3% of defence related employment" (ibid)
Was it your "buddy" who told you that you calculated Scotland's deficit by adding the GERS deficit to Scotland's share of the UK deficit?
Complain about this comment
104 Reluctant Expat.
What exactly was the UK DEFICIT over the period and HOW MUCH HIGHER per capita was it to the per capita Scottish deficit?
Every European nation runs a deficit - in all but two cases higher per capita than Scotland's .
Presumably these countries can't be independent either
Will you please stop flinging selective statistics about out of context?
I will not respond to any more of your silly posts and I don't think anyone else should.
Complain about this comment
Shouldn't Reluctant-Expat be called Reluctant-Employee?
The amount of posts here is incredible. ps. although you responded in your #102 to one point I made in my #99, it is interesting to note that the primary point I made over nuclear being dirty technology was completely ignored.
I think you need to get some sleep or find some other employment.
Complain about this comment
#112 RE
Again Confuscias try and twist words to your own meaining.I think if people look at your archive they'll see your comments regarding other EU countries. Pretty derisive would say.
"And to say Scotland is better than other nations is now "deriding" the other nations?"
Also, not once did you make the point Scotland was better then other nations. Check your posts, think you argued that the UK was better, there is a difference.
"No wonder the independence campaign failed AGAIN."
Why, how many has there been in your mind?
Complain about this comment
Calman evidence 'was tampered with'
Honest government? Think again
Complain about this comment
The Calman Commission?
The mouse that squeaked..
A commission which purports to examine options for the governance of Scotland but deliberately excludes the actual government of Scotland and its favoured option from the deliberations would provoke hoots of derision from our political cogniscenti were such a trick attempted in a banana republic.
What a hoot........ but it's not funny as long as our esteemed media continues treating the Calman Commission seriously.
Fortunately hoi polloi smell a rat (or a very small mouse)and are paying no attention. We still await the first honest man or woman from the major parties to see the very big writing on the wall ...or perhaps just the first one with any understanding of how the political flow is running
Complain about this comment
When you have both the Sunday Times and Scotland on Sunday attacking the Calman Con mission it must be very very bad indeed
Complain about this comment
#120. sneckedagain
The unionists are doing everything they can to thwart the truth in all aspects. Tuesday will be an interesting day to see what spin is put on the story.
Bankrupt Britain
Complain about this comment
The Calman Report is like a job interviewee.
Interviewee can turn up promptly on the day, immaculately dressed with answers that delight the interview panel.
Then when you probe certain aspects of the person's character, i.e. the interviewee's background, the answers become vague.
The conclusion being, this many be the most competent candidate, but they can not be trusted so they don't get the job.
Calman Report is very much like this. It may be the most glossy and well produced report, but I for one would not trust the report nor its findings.
The regional labour party in Scotland would not have commissioned this report with out drafting its conclusions for Mr Calman.
Dodgy dossiers, dodgy arms deals and now this latest nonsense of the arrested Tory shadow minister and whistle-blowing civil servant.
Trust labour, no thanks!
A McG
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS