Having it both ways
Did you hear John McFall on GMS this morning? He who chairs the Treasury Select Committee in the Commons?
The committee that is routinely described as "influential".
Mr McFall is a thoughtful and diligent MP. Disdaining bombast, he offers precise analysis, generally grounded in three elements: an evidence-based approach, a concern for the disadvantaged and basic loyalty to the UK Government.
I listened with interest to his views on how to encourage the banks to sustain productive lending in these difficult times.
In particular, I was struck by his key point. "We need competition", he said, adding for emphasis: "We need more competition".
Tiny point - but how does that square with the drive to merge HBOS with Lloyds TSB: a deal which in other circumstances would be ruled out by fundamental competition law?
Mr McFall was disarmingly open about the limits of political power.
Neither he nor ministers could set a rate for the banks with regard to lending. He was reluctant to rush to legislation, urging the banks to consider the gains in public image of being co-operative.
More generally, he stated: "You can't interfere with the workings of an organisation and I think it would be foolish for any government to lay down rules, hard and fast."
So far, so clear. Is it not, then, a touch illogical, for example, to complain bitterly when Northern Rock exercises due diligence in recouping difficult debts?
The Rock is now nationalised. It has been warned that it must timeously repay the debt due to the public. Why then should we be surprised if, under that constraint, they seek to get back some of their bad debts?
I am, of course, being deliberately provocative. I know exactly why there were complaints. It was because Northern Rock appeared to have become over-eager in repossessing properties.
But think. Politicians cannot have things both ways.
They cannot order Northern Rock to trade competitively in a fashion that refunds the public - then say: but we didn't mean that style of behaviour. No interference means no interference.
And back to HBOS. If the driver of reform in the banking system is competition, then why sanction a move which is explicitly anti-competitive: where competition rules have had to be suspended?
Again, I know the answer which is offered: that HBOS required rescue, not merely recapitalisation; that HBOS was in peril; that the merger is vital for the survival of the bank.
Good answers all - although others dispute that case. The verdict upon these arguments will be delivered by shareholders in the two banks. It would still appear at this stage that merger will go ahead.
However, in the by-going, perhaps we might be spared the pleas for greater competition in the banking sector.
UPDATE, 3:00pm:
Further re HBOS. As my colleague Robert Peston has already noted, the Chancellor has issued a statement pour encourager les autres: those others, that is, who feel that the HBOS take-over is not the final word.
Alistair Darling notes that there is "no automatic right of access" to the recapitalisation scheme.
To be fair, he never said that HBOS would definitely gain full-scale recapitalisation if the merger fell through.
He said, as I understand it, that any recapitalisation would require to be rethought in the light of the new circumstances.
In other words, recapitalisation is not solely predicated upon merger - but the current offer is calculated upon such a deal.
Today we learned more about how the Chancellor might redo his sums.
As you might guess, they would not be to the advantage of HBOS. Any capital to be injected into HBOS would be considerably more expensive.
Plus the likely outcome, according to the Treasury and the bank itself, would be effective nationalisation. Not something the bank wants.
Hence Lloyds TSB shareholders will be asked to endorse the deal tomorrow, with HBOS following a month later.
A little like the scenario which surrounded devolution in 1997 - when the eager Scots were asked to vote first while the referendum in sceptical Wales was deferred.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~39~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Good article Brian.
I have a healthy respect for Mr McFall, admiration even except occasionally when he is putting a case in illogical defence of government. Sometimes the best comment is no comment.
Perhaps his reference to competition is as honest a comment as will be heard from a politician. Both the current governments and the previous tory administration have trumpeted the importance of competition for as long as I can remember. Were they all so wrong for so long?
Complain about this comment
Brian
You surely cannot be telling us that politicians want their cake and to eat it also?
Politicians are not like that; they are all the "Saviours of the Universe".
Complain about this comment
Nobody believes a word that Labour ministers and Labour MPs have to say on the economy.
Complain about this comment
I think the question must be asked, "what is the real reason Brown is so determined to push through this merger".
Could it have anything to do with the fact that HBOS is a Scottish Bank?.
Could it have anything to do with the fact that he realised that the Nats had plans to use HBOS in the future in an independent Scotland?.
Why is this not discussed in the media?.
Why is he so determined not to allow HBOS to take advantage of the financial aid offered to other banks?.
Why is he allowing a bank which also needs financial aid to take over another bank?.
Is it possible he is taking advantage of this current financial situation to fulfill his own agenda?.
Complain about this comment
3. At 2:05pm on 18 Nov 2008, minuend wrote:
Nobody believes a word that Labour ministers and Labour MPs have to say on the economy.
---------------------
I don't believe a word from any MP/MSP from any party. They are all the same. They will make a statement based partly on fact but mainly on their own party line.
Complain about this comment
#3...minuend.. Wrong , wrong wrong....The fine intelligent voters of Glenrothes believed the Liebore Ministers and MP,s and aren,t the people of Scotland gong to suffer for it!!!
Complain about this comment
4. It's all a conspiracy to undermine the independence campaign!
And all the directors and shareholders of both banks are in on it!
Freeeeeedooooooooom!
Complain about this comment
Its been all very quite from Murphy since we learned of his phone call to the Scotsman about his conversation with Mr Spowart a highly respected businessman,I would like to see Murphy grilled a bit more about this and not allow him to over talk the questioner all the time ,come on Brian make it happen,are we all being coned about HBOS it will all come out in 39yrs only sorry I won't still be here to find out.Brian is there any way we can find out the compensation we the Tax Payer will have to shell out to Pay Point for the loss of the Post Office contract.
Complain about this comment
#7 RE
Tsk tsk, there's you using that nasty C'word again. Instead of maybe considering pertinent questions regarding situations and policies that affect the Scottish nation, rather than the independence case or the SNP, we'll scream out the C'word, rather than think about them and come up with a pertinent response.
No comment on what Mr McFall said, or would that compete with your unionist/labour sentiments?
Hasta manjana senor
Complain about this comment
The competition issue has always struck me as tricky. The EU nodded it through as an emergency measure but I always assumed that when things had quietened down the merged bank would be required to divest itself of some interests to meet competition criteria.
But that wouldn't make a good story so I assume that it is still a vast global plot started by American mortgage lenders at the behest of Gordon Brown and with the tacit support of central banks right around the world to cripple the global economy, throw millions out of work and wipe out the savings of ordinary folk in order to break HBOS (the bank having already been bought to a critical state of illiquidity by its chronically mismanaged English mortgage business) and thus put off Scottish independence for a generation if not forever given that by that stage the oil will have run out and everyone will be chewing on raw neeps!
On a more lighthearted level, I may be slow to this one but the "lookalike" in this edition's Private Eye is a hoot! Alec Salmond has been paired with Shrek! The resemblence is marked, but add in the accent and its inspired;-)
Complain about this comment
10. I don't see any similarity:
http://tinyurl.com/6d63zt
Complain about this comment
8. At 4:21pm on 18 Nov 2008, lionalibaba wrote:
Its been all very quite from Murphy since we learned of his phone call to the Scotsman about his conversation with Mr Spowart......
------------
It's also be very quiet from Mr Spowart with regards to the "interested party" in taking over HBOS.
Perhaps he could enlighten us all.
Complain about this comment
The Bank of Scotland was founded by the Scottish Government in 1695, to fund the Compagnie of Scotland and its bold if disastrously poorly organised attempt to seize the Panama Isthmus. Scotland - more or less the whole nation of Scotland - was bankrupted by the failure of that venture, and it was that crash both in our finances and our national self confidence which led directly to the Act of Union.
So the Bank is a key symbol in our history, in who we are as a nation. Its also the oldest bank in Britain. So it's not perverse to take some pride in the institution, even if it was born in epic failure.
Also, our banks are some of Scotland's highest profile institutions; when they were doing well they raised our national morale, now they're in serious trouble they depress it. The Trustee Savings Bank was also, once a Scottish institution, and it has already been swallowed by Lloyds; it will have a negative impact on the national psyche if the Bank of Scotland goes the same way.
Gordon Brown is a politician and an able one. He knows that, whatever the merits of the financial case, when Scotland feels self confident the nationalists do better, when we feel less self confident the nationalists do worse.
It would be ridiculous to suggest that spiting the SNP was the only, or even the main, reason that Gordon Brown wants the Bank of Scotland humbled, but he wouldn't be human if it wasn't one of the reasons. And, of course, it will work - people are already wondering whether Scotland could be independent if our banks have failed so badly.
And, lets face it, if our banks had failed as badly under independence as they have under the union - because, lets be clear about this, both the Bank of Scotland and the Royal Bank really are in trouble and that real trouble is mainly of their own making - then an independent Scotland would have found that very tough.
But let's be clear about this: our banks have got into trouble under corporate governance regimes set by the Union government. It we had been independent we'd probably have been in the Euro Zone, and consequently our currency would not be vulnerable to the international speculative pressure which is currently undermining the pound. And Scotland's underlying economy remains strong - we're still an energy rich nation, not only in oil, but also in 'green' energy; we still have a well educated population. The loss of the Bank of Scotland may be humiliating in the short term, but independence is not a short term project.
Oh, and before anyone pours scorn on the Compagnie of Scotland - yes, it was an epic failure. Yes, the reasons for that failure were in poor planning and poor preparation. But if Scotland had succeeded - if we had been able to control trade between the Atlantic and the Pacific - then the history of the last three hundred years would have been interestingly different. It was a desperate gamble, but the prize would have been worth it.
Complain about this comment
8. At 4:21pm on 18 Nov 2008, lionalibaba wrote:
Its been all very quite from Murphy since we learned of his phone call to the Scotsman about his conversation with Mr Spowart......
------------
12. At 5:08pm on 18 Nov 2008, Neil_Small147 wrote:
It's also be very quiet from Mr Spowart with regards to the "interested party" in taking over HBOS.
Perhaps he could enlighten us all.
------------
14. At 5:20pm on 18 Nov 2008,
I wrote:
It's also been very quiet from Shrek and his crew since Glenrothes.
Complain about this comment
11. Reluctant Expat
Having looked again I think that Alec has gone to great lengths to avoid the comparison by taping his ears back.
Maybe it was also the fact that Shrek leads a group of bizarre fairytale creatures....oh your know!
Complain about this comment
13. And who says there is no imperialism in Scottish nationalism!
Complain about this comment
13 Simon_Brooke
Nice post and well explained. I don't however agree with equating the present 20% drop in the value of Sterling (albeit from a recent high) with the UK banking governance regime. Similarly, I've seen no shortage of Eurozone banks in trouble...Fortis, BNP Paribas despite their trading being denominated in Euros.
Alternatively, take some solace in the fact that as we will have to "trade our way out this" the relatively depressed pound will be a boon to exporters...at least presumably once the international credit markets are ungummed. Had Scotland been in the Eurozone it would be saddled with a high relative costs o its main markets, it's oil-dollars would buy fewer Euros and tourism from South of the Border would be deterred (presumably not a bad thing in the eyes of the real tartan zealots). This is of course speculation but it will be interesting to see how the Republic of Ireland recovers from its present difficulties as a Eurozone member
Complain about this comment
16 Reluctant Expat
Be fair...I think he was joking. After all you have to build a canal to control trade betwen the Pacific and the Atlantic. Something that was completely beyond anyone until doctors unlocked the secrets of malaria at the end of the 19th Century. Up until that point, Panama was a little more than graveyard for Europeans.
Which begs a further question. Why did the kilt become a popular form of clothing in a country noted for biting insects?
Complain about this comment
#11 - I see RE displays the limits of his intellectual argument yet again.
Of course, Brown is such a looker (or is Call-me-Dave more your cup of cha?)
Complain about this comment
The Unionists are just jealous because Alex stole the show the other night on CiN.
I think there should be something of a cooling off period regarding this merger a bit like getting 28 days grace on goods bought. To me the whole thing feels very rushed and cynically done. It's time we demanded transparency on such an important issue for Scotland.
I completely concur that Murphy has quickly established himself as an extremely dodgy operator. He obviously sees himself on the fast-track to a more lucrative 'prestigious' brief at the behest of Don Gordo. It's like a cut rate version of Godfather 3 where the weary old Pacino strives for legitimacy whilst the young Garcia ambitious upstart's recklessness is a constant source of aggravation to him thus he takes him under his wing and really shows him how to operate with cloak and dagger.
I am young enough to hopefully be around in 30 years time when FoI will allow us to see just how bad a hand Scotland is being dealt at present. That's if I haven't emigrated for good and taken up citizenship elsewhere if my fellow Scots break my heart and vote No in 2010.
Complain about this comment
The ROI is a much richer country per capita than Scotland or England. It did go into recession first but is predicted to come out of recession more quickly than the UK. And they'll still be much richer per head than us as well. Well done Ireland. I sincerely hope Scotland can soon emulate your success as opposed to the terminally moribund state we have as part of the UK.
Complain about this comment
Re4.
The reason HBOS is in the mess it is in is entirely due to decisions that HBOS made. It appears that on probability HBOS requires to merge with LTSB or be nationalised. Alistair Darling is correct to say no if this is not a good deal for taxpayers.
Nationalisation would not benefit shareholders so they are going to vote for merger.
Now those who make the pathetic point that this happened under "union rules" need to get a grip on reality. Mr Salmond has never campaigned on a platform of tighter regulation or more stringent financial controls. So lets be clear it would have happened on any of the politicians watch. So lets move on.
HBOS and LTSB together will stifle competition. It has to. So we should be questioning the government in Westminster on how they intend to maintain competition in the new world. Our Scottish Government should be campaigning on the same platform on our behalf.
It is essential that the government are taken to task in a constructive way on this subject.
It appears to me GB has been allowed to reinvent himself because no other party has got a grip of the crisis. The Tories seem to change opinion every day, SNP have been poor at putting across a different vision for Scotland. So in an independant Scotland what would they now be doing that would be different and how would it make a difference?
We need to remember why Gordon and Labour were so unpopular before this crisis. Because the opposition were rightly and sucessfully picking gaping holes in what they were doing.
Now suddenly the opposition can do little or nothing to challenge what Labour are doing. I reckon the "financial Stimulus" package needs serious looking at. Looks like a "spend now pay heavily later plan" and I fear onward costs have not been thought through properly. (Unless it means a new School for Wick, then it would be OK!)
So we need to challenge the government in the real world on the issues of the day and stop the conspiracy theories!
Complain about this comment
The question I would like answered if quite simple:
Why would any finance deal for an independent HBOS be less favourable than for a combined Lloyds / HBOS, or even an seperate Lloyds TSB? What is the justification? Surely the Chancellor did not mean his statement as a threat to HBOS share holders (better watch, RE will on shouting the C word again), i.e. toe the line or suffer the consequences?
Now, I don't subscribe the all the conspiracy theories but something does stink about this whole affair. Why was Brown brokering a deal between the banks before HBOS's problems became public? Why was a financial package only considered when Lloyds TSB ran into trouble? Why were commerical-in-confidence talks put into the public domain? Why were (at least in one case) alternative bidders, potential or otherwise, "discouraged" by Government ministers?
Regardless of your politics, there's no denying that Brown has decided HBOS is to cease as an independent bank and, in his view, nothing will be allowed to stop that. Now, he has shown himself to be petty on previous occasions, but surely even he would not be destroying Britain's oldest bank for party political reasons. Surely not, but this whole episode does not exactly cover in glory.
Complain about this comment
#12 Neil
"It's also be very quiet from Mr Spowart with regards to the "interested party" in taking over HBOS.
Perhaps he could enlighten us all."
...erm, confidentiality?
Complain about this comment
20. At 5:48pm on 18 Nov 2008, bluelaw wrote:
The Unionists are just jealous because Alex stole the show the other night on CiN.
---------------------
Maybe it shows he has a talent for acting.
Complain about this comment
12
You really should read some serious newspapers. Mr Spowat's disgust at being forced to discontinue his effort to bring other players on board by deliberate Government sabotage is all over the Sunday Herald and mentioned in several others.
Complain about this comment
19 ForteanJo
I'm pushed to think of any fanciable politicians. Some Tory backbenchers used to get the hots for Margeret Thatcher which was bizarre and can only go to prove that that there is such a thing as the "Aphrodisiac of Power".
Could this really be the true reason behind Alec's bid to be Supreme Leader. What a terrifying thought!
Complain about this comment
#13 - If you are a believer in Simon Brooke (maybe if you are the man), i could understand why you may thing that one colony would be all you need. I think though that there are fundamental misunderstandings of the origin of trade and the protection of such.
While initailly international trade, fundamentally spice, was ruled by both Portugal and Spain! All because of connections, well because the Pope was Spanish and because Portugal kicked up an almighty stink. They sustain their trade rights through military power, the strongest navies in the christian world. From then on it was a combination of luck that gave to the rise of Holland and England, changing tastes in commodities. All were protect by military prowess.
Anyway the main reasons Scotland failed in it's imperial attempts was because no one wanted to let Scotland have an empire and as such refused to trade with the colonies. The French kicked the Scots out of Nova Scotia. Then there was Stuart's Town in Carolina, were the Spanish kicked them out. Then the Darien venture, land once settled by the Spanish, but found to be unhabitable. The New World had been divided up and there was no room for an independant Scotland. They had no monopoly on any commodity, and no naval power to protect it even if they did. The problem with Scotland carving out it's own little bit was that they were just too late, and too weak to take anything by force.
The SNP said that there should be less regulation of the banking system in Scotland, so god knows what would have happened there.
In regards to Spowart, I'm willing to put £10 towards the takeover, if anyone wants to join me it makes us £10 a man nearer than he. In my opinion he was just mischief making, any body with enough funds to carry through the rescue, would be very unlikely to be even British. Let us all face it though, Globalisation makes it very likely that HBOS, even BoS before would probably not have a majority of Scottish shareholders. Spowarts comments have only made the situation worse, they could have even let to Lloyds reduce their bid.
Complain about this comment
20. You well and truly lost any credibility on your post when you said, "Alex stole the show the other night on CiN."
Oh dear!
Complain about this comment
20 Bluelaw
Thirty years to wait for the truth...whatever it is. In the meantime The Freedom of Speculation Act remains in force and you can post your wisdom as you see fitlike.
I still don't understand why you don't return to Scotland straightaway to both put your shoulder to the economy and to campaign for independence? You may think that you will return but I suspect that your wallet emigrated some years ago;-)
Complain about this comment
21 Bluelaw
Yes...well done Ireland. The economic transformation has done wonders for the country and I'm genuinely pleased for them.
The snag with your argument is that a big part of the RoI's growth, like the UK stemmed from house price inflation (which has been epic in Ireland over the past 10 years). I'm not sure that their route to recovery will be markedly different from our own, unless you believe highly politicised predictions made up on the spur of the moment.
I was simply stating originally that given that they will be tied to the "one size fits all" Euro interest rate it will be interesting to see if they can stimulate their economy. This will surely be a pointer to the claims made for an independent Scotland in the Eurozone. If succesful, it can be proven that small economies can thrive alongside the apparantly stronger economic management demands of France, Germany, Spain and Italy.
Complain about this comment
21. So you seriously want Scotland to become heavily reliant on EU aid to the tune of many billions a year (total aid accounted for over 60% of Ireland's GDP at its peak)?
What a proud nation the nationalists want us to become.
Over the past 20-25 years, the UK economy has grown more than any other unsubsidised European economy. And that includes Salmond's latest 'arc of prosperity'.
THAT is a record to be proud of as opposed to the nationalist dream of us becoming yet another EU 'beggar state'.
23. Salmond has never campaigned on a platform of tighter regulation or more stringent financial controls
Before this crisis broke, Salmond campaigned for LESS banking regulation, only to do a swift 'I hope nobody notices' U-turn a few months back.
Complain about this comment
The SNP have been 'poor' in putting across a different case in this affair because of the way in which the media including the BBC is against them. The moment an SNP representative appears on TV the studio interviewer's aggressionometer hits max. And the Print media are like Pravda in terms of supporting Nulab.
Complain about this comment
NorthHighlander:
#22
"Now those who make the pathetic point that this happened under "union rules" need to get a grip on reality. Mr Salmond has never campaigned on a platform of tighter regulation or more stringent financial controls. So lets be clear it would have happened on any of the politicians watch. So lets move on."
To keep your comment balanced, First Minister Salmond never campaigned to reduce regulation for our financial markets nor did Salmond suggest to increase them! The situation did not happen under Union rules. The situation happened under Labour which happens to support the Union. If at all, Labour have knocked back confidence that by remaining in the Union, Scotland is better protected. Under Labour anyway, perhaps the Tories will be able to encourage Scotland that we are better protected inside rather then out the Union? Who knows. Only time can tell.
"So in an independant Scotland what would they now be doing that would be different and how would it make a difference?"
This question is unfair. You are asking Scottish Nationalists, Pro-Independence supporters or Pro-SNP supporters (the only groups who would reply), how would an Independent Scotland manage to handle financial affairs when no one knows how able an Independent Scotland would be in 2008. If Scotland was a success which lasted untill this day then I believe Scotland (with a surplus because potentially we could be that successful) could have had the resources to ensure confidence in our markets to protect against possible runs on our banks. Maybe even copy Aussies regulation system?
Or if Scotland was unsuccessful to this day, which many of course believe, then we would be bankrupt, China would own everything, and every family for generations and our Scottish Government would be selling us to the English Parliament under some type of Union...
;-)
Complain about this comment
#22 northhighlander
I agree with a lot of your post.
Politics is all about perception, and the world's financial crisis has changed the perception of Brown. In today's personalised politics, the leader seems to be more important than the party or its ideas.
The shallowness of the Tories has really been exposed, hence the extreme volatility of the UK polls.
I wish the SNP would recognise the other aspect of its constitutional change agenda, and push the need for greater involvement in Europe, and less reliance on the vulnerable UK.
Complain about this comment
# 23 - Forteanjo
The reason for the difference is to do with capital gearing! It is a very boring subject, but the gearing of a company may reflect the risk of an investment, depending on Industry. The gearing of both banks together is far more attractive than individually. The normal people to take the nod from are the institutional investors, they aren't shy in mouthing off when they believe their investments will be damaged. Most if not all of these investors are in favour of the merger.
Complain about this comment
This is what GB wrote back in March 08.
'I was accused of crying wolf. But when secessionist forces are loudly at work it is not the time for silence and passivity. We must be resolute in defending the Union and argue against those who put it at risk.'
Gordon Brown: We must defend the Union
Complain about this comment
24. At 6:04pm on 18 Nov 2008, ScotInNotts wrote:
#12 Neil
"It's also be very quiet from Mr Spowart with regards to the "interested party" in taking over HBOS.
Perhaps he could enlighten us all."
...erm, confidentiality?
-------------
In that case, why did he tell Alex Salmond? He could have easily told Gordon Brown in full confidence, along with Alex. The public did not need to know about the potential bidder until things were more firmed up.
Spowart is playing politics.
Complain about this comment
From what ive read ,Gordon is very friendly with Victor Blank and other Lloyds/Tsb high up folks ..... could a banking job after politics be in order ???
Complain about this comment
It's so true what Alex Salmond says: Unionists are no longer content to run Scotland down. They have to run every other country down as well.
Ireland does not rely solely on EU funds for its economic strength.
No other country including the ROI has allowed its housing market to skewer its economy the way in which the SE has and by default all those economies closely associated with it such as Scotland.
The plain fact is the ROI like other independent countries has the legislative basis to respond to circumstances that befit its own circumstances. Scotland doesn't quite clearly. So yes they've committed themselves to the rigours of Euro membership but unlike Scotland they can for example guarantee all bonds in Irish banks as they did very quickly when the crisis first emerged.
And again; none of this detracts from the fact the ROI will emerge from recession MUCH RICHER per capita than the UK. Would that we in Scotland were similarly afforded the ROI's luxurious position at present and in future.
Complain about this comment
#31 Anglophone
I think there are two debates over the eurozone (though interlinked).
Are a number of smaller economies (including the UK) going to decide that while keeping their own currency seemed to be fine while leverage of debt could create an illusion of buoyancy, does not being part of a reserve currency lead to vulnerability in the more realistic world economy to come.
Worth keeping an eye not only on Iceland, but also Denmark and Sweden.
The second question is how would an expanded eurozone affect the smaller economies within it.
There are no certainties in this world!
Complain about this comment
#37
Yes, and!!!
Complain about this comment
#39 rabbiehippo
I think running the World Bank or the IMF is more in his sights, than being a counter clerk in Lloyds/TSB in North Queensferry!
:-)
#36 SKaufman
I suspect you know more of these technicalities than I do, and it will be to the benefit of the shareholders to accept the merger - especially after Darling's "threat".
What are your views on why Darling made this statement, and what do you think will happen subsequently when competition rules become important to the EU/UK again?
Complain about this comment
Re #17 Anglophone
it's oil-dollars would buy less Euros
on what planet?
more unionist drivel that is based upon some warped fantasy
Are you sure you wouldn't like to exclude oil all together, I've noticed it has become popular with the monster-raving unionists that haunt this blog.
Nothing like excluding something that just because it screws up your arguements - hmmm excluding things fromthe numbers because they make you look bad / stupid - are you a member of the London labour party?
Complain about this comment
Very good article Brian.
Complain about this comment
A Couple of points:
Spowart: has withdrawn from the game, the Bank of China were positively discouraged (potentially for good reason) by Darling.
HBoS: isn't a Scottish bank. It's a capitalist organisation that offers no allegiance to Scotland. It hasn't been Scottish since the merger several years ago.
Salmond/Shrek: I think both are the good guys. I always liked Shrek.
Salmod in CiN: see above. Good guy, this just proves it.
Lloyds Merger: anti competitive nonsense. I just can't see why Labour tied themselves so much to it. Bizarre. Did you see the Labour MSP on Newsnight about it, what a complete dummy.
Complain about this comment
See that guy in the pub, that you are convinced is a member of the BNP?
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator] has the entire BNP membership list for 2007-8, but it would be quite immoral for you to consult it!
Complain about this comment
Re 34 Thomas Porter
Thomas
You are clutching at straws a bit here. "Salmond didn't campaign for or against financial regulation" really makes my point, he didn't see it coming the same as everyone else.
I do think though that the SNP are missing a trick. They should be developing an argument that accentuates what could be done in an independant Scotland.
I feel a reason that Brown is fairing well is that he is offering a vision, some hope. I don't think it is necessarily the right vision but it is the only show in town. People are looking for leadership and a way forward. Oldnat makes a good point, if independance in europe is a good policy surely now is the time to shout about it.
The other point is that the current circumstances probably present a unique opportunity in that people are giving serious thought to politics in a way not nromaly seen. This is a defining time for politics in Britain. Opportunities to alter the course of events are being missed.
Complain about this comment
# 43 Oldnat
I believe that the Chancellor was basicly keeping the markets informed. That in theoy it would be possible for HBOS to ask for recapitalisation in it's own right, however, if this was the case they would not be guaranteed the same deal. The markets don't hate bad news, they hate unpredictability.
If the UK Plc was to invest in an independent HBOS the risk would be far greater because of the poor gearing, so the Plc would want a larger return for the larger risk! It woul not be possible to offer both options the same deal. There is the Modigliani and Miller theory on this that says the cost of equity should not be more expense because of the gearing, however it does make a lot of assumptions and never really takes into account the increased risk of investment.
It may be lovely to be in some peoples warped realities, but in the real world, their is no one else willing/able to recapitalise the organisation and the only other option apart from Lloyds is total nationalisation!
Complain about this comment
Mods
Please withdraw my post #47.
On second thoughts it was inappropriate.
Complain about this comment
Re 40 bluelaw
here we go again. If only we were Ireland everything would be fine. The recession is not our fault it is the bad people in Westminster.
We didn't want to borrow all the money we have and couldn't afford, they told us to.
We are blameless!
Alec is right it is all the unionists fault.
This is the attitude that stops us from moving on and finding a better way of government. We have got to stop blaming everyone else and start talking up what we can achieve.
Complain about this comment
A first for me!
I referred one of my own posts - it was inappropriate.
Complain about this comment
#49 SKaufman
Thanks. That was useful.
Do you have a view on my second question re competition law being applioed in the future?
Complain about this comment
51. At 10:13pm on 18 Nov 2008, northhighlander wrote:
This is the attitude that stops us from moving on and finding a better way of government. We have got to stop blaming everyone else and start talking up what we can achieve.
----------------
I think you have summed it up right.
Look at Lanarkshire's cancer screening. Nicola Sturgeon sent in a task team which has improved times. Now we don't have all the story, but if this is a success then why not more? That is the sort of action people want.
Salmond's approach is often "not our fault". It is becoming tiresome and I am now starting to wonder if he has reached his peak on a political popularity scale. I do not think he can push them much further.
Of course it is still early days, but it makes me wonder why Jim Sillars popped his head up after Glenrothes.
Complain about this comment
#51 northhighlander
I don't disagree with your views on the position of the more extreme nationalists.
I would hope that you would also be opposed to the position of the more extreme UK Unionists.
Complain about this comment
Market share is only temporary, while it is true that the Lloyds TSB/HBoS Group (whatever it gets called) will have an overlarge market share, it is very very unlikely it will have a controlling market share. It is likely that through the consumer cycle, market share will even out into an acceptable formula.
It would also be unwise for the group to want to maintain it's current policies or lending/savings ratio (aimed at HBoS). So they too would want to actively reduce their market share to make their portfolio more stable.
Hope this kind of explains my opinion on the monopoly situation!
Complain about this comment
55 oldnat
Totally agree. You will note although I remain unconvinced on nationalism, I never attach myself to any of the more extreme factions of the unionist debate.
In reality one lot is as bad as the other, they both stop us sorting out our future in a mature and sensible way.
I like the post about Nicola Sturgeon's Cancer time sucess story. We should hear more of that. I think she is dong a good job and am happy to give credit where it is due.
If we concentrated more on making the best of what we have then who knows maybe a consensus would develop for a new system of government.
Complain about this comment
I cannot think of any other reason for Brown and Darling destroying two major Scottish banks other than simply they are Scottish. They fear the SNP so much that they would hurt their own people if it meant damage to the SNP. My reaction is to think that more than ever Scotland needs INDEPENDENCE.
Complain about this comment
I am not an extreme nationalist. I believe in the independence and sovereignty of Scotland within the EU. I want Scotland to interact with the world as any other small independent EU country interacts with the world. If you care to explain how this is extreme I'm all eyes.
As for the 'blame game' and comparisons with other countries. I feel nationalists like myself have every right to hold Westminster to account. Westminster purports to be the saviour of Scotland, claims any 'success' Scotland might enjoy yet has in the most criminal of ways and amongst other things completely lied about the level of oil revenues Scotland generates since they started to contribute massively to the UK Exchequer some thirty years ago. They have done everything they can including using wholly undemocratic means to deflect attention away from this disgraceful deceit including the almost as disgusting spin that has entered the concisousness of the entire UK pop that Scotland is a subsidy junkie living off England's and more specifically London's fat.
This and a whole multitude of lies and deceit promulaged by the very people who are meant to defend our interests has contrived to make Scots some of the poorest in relative terms of any comparable EU country.
So if you're happy with Scotland being the sole country in the EU whose population leaves like no other because there's so little on offer, its media and politics treating it like an errant child and all the insidious nonsense that results, if you're happy with the poverty that affllcts Scotland, it's appalling near 3rd world health, utterly depressing crime stats, it's almost archaic infrastructure, its barely functioning hospitals, its skint and scared pensioners, its kids doing drugs and stabbing each other more than anywhere else and even its so called moneyed middle classes looking like the poor relations of their Scandinavian and German counterparts then carry on spouting your nonsense about so-called extremists like myself.
But I will never quieten down on what I regard as not only a national but an international disgrace because I believe if this had happened in any other country there'd have been at the very least huge protests and possibly some sort of revolution and God forbid as in so many cases a violent uprising. So as far as I am concerned what you're getting from me is pretty light and peaceful and civic and inclusive and magnanimous in comparison to the manner in which the crimes affected against Scotland have been carried out.
It's time some of you faced facts and I make no apology for causing any offence: Scotland has and is to all intents and purposes ruled by a hostile foreign power and if any Scot is too scared or too stupid to see this then I feel the utmost pity for them.
Complain about this comment
#58 donaldbrose
Before some UK Unionist points it out to you, the banks (along with many others around the world) destroyed themselves.
The issue is that UK politicians (along with many others around the world - and frankly there is no reason to believe that politicians in an independent Scotland would have been different) allowed the banks to behave irresponsibly to the bankers profit, and the public's disadvantage.
The banks chose to buy leveraged toxic debt from the USA, and indulge in stupid mortgage lending practices in the UK.
If you want to promote Scottish independence within Europe, you need to post more rationally.
Complain about this comment
#59 bluelaw
"I am not an extreme nationalist."
You could have fooled me!
You have said that you visit Scotland regularly, but I don't recognise the Scotland you are describing.
"it's (sic) appalling near 3rd world health, utterly depressing crime stats, it's (sic) almost archaic infrastructure, its barely functioning hospitals, its skint and scared pensioners, its kids doing drugs and stabbing each other more than anywhere else"
You and Reluctant_Expat deserve each other as equally variant from reality.
Complain about this comment
How have I been extreme oldnat? As I said elsewhere you're the not the honest broker you like to think you are.
You only see what you want to see. There's good things about Scotland despite what has gone on. Everything I referred to is based in fact and statistic. You're welcome to contradict it.
Complain about this comment
#61 - I'm a card-carrying nat and I recognise all that... there is no point in denying that Scotland faces real problems, which all the west-coast style confrontational denials in the world cannot erase.
Anyway, the reason I'm writing - given there's at least a reasonable chance that the EU will be uneasy about an independent Scotland (it would give a precedent to every other breakaway region and spark up heated debate at the very least in the Basque country, Corsica, Flanders, Milan etc., even the Cornish would be enthused), why don't we give old fashioned protectionism a go? Scotland is a small enough country to try to operate in a close to self sufficient capacity with high tariffs on imports. Couple this with more relaxed immigration and we could see a real boom in farming and manufacturing.
This is unlikely I know, but I would be interested to hear why it wouldn't work. I certainly don't think it's any more stupid than bankrolling the financial sector.
Hmmm, while I'm on the subject, is there any reason the Government didn't just say "To Hell with the shareholders and senior management!", close all nationalised banks to new business and raise/lower interest rates to pressure existing customers to look elsewhere for business?
Complain about this comment
Since people are discussing Irlenad look whats come down the wires this morning.
"The Irish government is believed to be on the brink of launching a multi-billion euro rescue plan for the country's banks.
The Irish Independent newspaper's reporting the bail-out will include taxpayers money.
It says the government's accepted it will have to put in public cash."
Anyway, back on topic, I understand why HBOs shareholders are opposed to this deal but what I don't really understand is why Lloyds TSB shareholders want it - why would you want to take over a bank on the edge of collapse with massive debts?
It's not as if it is really opening a new market for them - surely for Lloyds TSBs point of view it would just be better if HBOS folded?
Complain about this comment
#61 oldnat
You've never been to some areas of Glasgow, although this is not representative of the whole country.
It would be akin to taking Norwich as representative of England.
Or Queens as representitive of new York
Complain about this comment
34. "Salmond never campaigned to reduce regulation for our financial markets nor did Salmond suggest to increase them!"
Selective memory kicking in again, Master Porter?
Salmond in Apr 2007: "We are pledging a light-touch regulation suitable to a Scottish financial sector with its outstanding reputation for probity as opposed to one like that in the UK, which absorbs huge amounts of management time in 'gold-plated' regulation".
Salmond got it wrong AGAIN.
This has been pointed out to you several times already. Why do you keep pretending you don't know this?
Complain about this comment
An independent Scotland would be welcomed by the EU. The idea that certain member countries would veto its entry to dissuade their separatists is scaremongering nonsense.
To me this is another great Unionist contradiction. Scotland is supposedly too poor, too stupid etc etc to govern itself. In other words Scotland's too insignificant to be viable but somehow it metamorphosises into this great significant European leader causing disarray around Europe by becoming independent and to which every EU country must desperately stifle for fear of the havoc its example will wreak and how it will encourage others.
The truth is that there is no evidence of any country supporting a veto or planning to for these or any other reasons. The accession of Eastern European states, which threatened the financial status of many countries in the EU and which even France and Germany (the axis of anti-English-speaking evil according to Westminster) had misgivings about went through without veto. Why Scotland which is subject to all EU laws at present, is and would be a net contributor, stable, liked even and is essentially a de facto member already would suddenly have member states rushing to use their veto is nonsense.
Complain about this comment
44 Bloggger
I'm struggling to see why this is hard to understand. If Scotland was independent and a Eurozone member we would assume that oil companies operating there would have to report their results in Euros.
At the moment oil is still traded globally in US Dollars (the current relative weakness of the dollar is one of the reasons why the price escalalted so rapidly last year). If you sell oil in comparatively weak dollars, then exchange those dollars for comparatively strong Euros so that they can be spent in Scotland you end up with less money. It's called exchange risk and it has always been around. Please trust me on this one.
Conversely of course, if the Euro was relatively weak to the Dollar, you would end up with more money. It's the other side of the same coin.
I am not a member of any political party and, if there's one thing that really bugs me in all these debates, it's the inability of anyone on either side of the argument to present basic, comprehensive economic information. Nobody seems able to put together an unambiguous assessment of oil income versus public expenditure over time. They just selectively pick the years that prove whatever point that they are trying to make.
So cool yer jets and go and look up "exchange rate risk" in any economic textbook.
Complain about this comment
#38 Neil
"In that case, why did he tell Alex Salmond? He could have easily told Gordon Brown in full confidence, along with Alex. The public did not need to know about the potential bidder until things were more firmed up.
Spowart is playing politics."
What and when did Spowart tell AS that he did not tell Jim Murphy GB? You're quite right the public didn't need to know, so why did Murphy give the quotes he did to the press?
As for the Shrek anaolgy, didn't he manage to get his land back from Lord Farquaad a.k.a. GB? ;)
Complain about this comment
40 Bluelaw
"And again, none of this detracts from the fact that RoI will emerge from recession MUCH RICHER per capita than the UK".
Bluelaw - the RoI currently enjoys a greater per capita GDP than the UK so it is already in a sense richer than the UK. I don't see why it should, emerging from the same recession as us become MUCH RICHER?
Capitalisation suggests that you are shouting and that's no way to win an argument;-) Can you explain why Ireland will become even richer on the back of this recession other than just wishful thinking?
Loved post 59 by the way. You must have had to go to bed after that!
Complain about this comment
This is becoming quite tedious.
67. bluelaw: To me this is another great Unionist contradiction. Scotland is supposedly too poor, too stupid etc etc to govern itself. "
No. This particular aspect of the overwhelming case against independence is that there is no evidence or indicator to suggest life in Scotland would benefit from it.
How come so many nationalists are so damn stupid that they cannot grasp this simple point?
I look forward to the shrill stampede as the nationalists regurgitate their heavily-discredited, wholly irrelevant and just plain nonsensical arguments.
Complain about this comment
67 Bluelaw
I don't think that Scotland's EU membership would be vetoed. But equally I don't think that it would go through on the nod as you suggest. The negotiations would certainly include some hard bargaining on the EU contributions, fishing rights, offshore infrastructure access. maritime boundaries (with RoI and Denmark, not just the UK).
At the very least it would drag in the rest of the UK on the "UK rebate" issue which I assume that Scotland would lose, making the the 1974 contribution level the starting point for negotiation. It is inconceiveable that other big net EU contributors would not try to bundle this issue up into Scottish accession talks.
Despite your ranting I would respecfully suggest that few Scots would exchange their "impoverishment" with say...the average Bulgarian or Romanian. EU money is flowing East at the moment.
It will equally be very intersting to see how the RoI economy performs once it becomes a net contributor to EU funds. As it now has one of the highest GDPs per capita in Europe, as you repeatedly point out, don't you agree that it is time for them to step up to the mark?
Complain about this comment
Parts of Glasgow are a microsm of Scotland at its worst (despite how much I love the city and people there) I agree. But to believe that other cities and indeed the rest of the country don't have similar problems and aren't that far removed from it is delusional nonsense.
Complain about this comment
69 ScotinNotts
Taking the Shrek analogy further. Didn't he end up travelling to the land of Far Far Away a.k.a. Brussels? In the meantime though I look forward to Alec leading off the karaoke at the end. In the film it was "Don't go Changin!". That would be a nice touch!
Complain about this comment
40. Again, I remind you that Ireland benefited from billions upon billions of EU aid over a 40 year period, amounting to 60% of GDP at its peak. (And they are STILL receiving aid!)
That is the (rough) equivalent to the UK receiving EU aid averaging ?20bn a year for 40 years.
What could Scotland do with a ?2bn a year share of that windfall?
Imagine all the projects and/or tax cuts that could be funded with that.
Now do you get a clearer picture of this so-called 'Irish miracle'?
Complain about this comment
I meant as in it's much richer to begin with and it will remain despite recession much richer. I wasn't shouting I was merely emphasising that despite all the defamatory anti-Irish nonsense spouted by Unionists Ireland is richer than the UK. But then again most comparable EU countries are per capita richer than Scotland when there's absolutely no excuse for Scotland not to be on equal terms and indeed in some cases easily surpassing some of them. It's Scottish success that Unionists fear most. They're completely threatened by the idea of a self-confident and prosperous Scotland and that's why as we see here and elsewhere every day they'll do anything to damn Scotland. It's time my fellow Scots got serious about ending this state of affairs. It's time to face up to what has gone on but also what needs to be done.
Complain about this comment
#71 Why are you so aggressive to nationalists? You must have a huge chip on your shoulder. We might not agree with Labour on a whole host of issues but we dont call them stupid ...sheep maybe but not stupid. I think your only on here to stir it up as a lot of what you've posted has been shown to be c**p. If i were you id get a life and maybe calm down a bit ... its only a blog ...its not like the public read this in their masses , and voters swayed...its a blog.. it doesnt matter !
Complain about this comment
Due to the continuous repetition of the same line of specious arguement which RE and Anglophone bring to every topic this debate has already become tedious and irritating.
Any chance of getting back to the original subject matter ie why is the UK Government so determined on a course of action which will cost many thousands of jobs in Scotland and England
Complain about this comment
I just love how concerned you are about Scotland's future anglophone. It's almost touching. People always describe that which upsets them as someone else's ranting.
Well, that just shows how badly off we are if we are only better off than Romanians or Bulgarians. I can just hear the Unionist cry: the Union dividend means we're doing better than Romania and Bulgaria so you Scots just keep quiet and let us get on with looking after you... Conversely though, how many Irish, Danes, Norwegians, Swedes, Finns, Austrians would swap places with Scots and would wish to be in their or indeed England's shoes. 'Damn few' as well we all know.
Of course without international arbitration Scotland wouldn't win the rebate question with England because England still behaves like an Imperial power with any country unfortunate enough to come within its jurisdiction.
Scotland's Maritime boundaries are already established and have only been threatened by England who moved Scots territorial waters beginning near Berwick to now near Carnoustie it what can only be described as an Oklahoman-style oil grab. It's more scaremongering nonsense from Unionists to suggest there'd be protracted negotiations with the EU. The difference is of course that any renegotiation will be on terms as favourable as possible to Scottish interests not Westminster's and even if Scotland took the decision not to be in the EU then that would be ours alone and no-one would have made that decision for us.
Complain about this comment
#74 Anglophone,
He did go to the land of Far Far Away, after he got his land back mind you. What have you got in mind, UN ambassador? And they all lived happily ever after......
Complain about this comment
Sneckedagain, now do you have that list of social issues where Scotland has distinctly different attitudes compared to the rest of the UK?
You seemed to believe that such a list exists, even though repeated polls show otherwise (and if anyone could find my post where I gave many examples, I would be most grateful).
Complain about this comment
Wasn't Farquaad's song staying alive? Very apt for GB eh? ;)
Complain about this comment
Scotland doesn't need subsidies from anyone. Scotland just needs independence and to be in receipt of her revenues and for her people to have the level playing field I feel they richly deserve after what has gone on now for far too long.
Complain about this comment
Nonsense ex-pat. There are many solid reasons to believe not only would Scotland do better as an independent but moreso would be transformed as an independent.
Complain about this comment
Oil is now down to $50 a barrel.
Prices have now crashed 65% in just 15 weeks.
Where is Salmond and his claims of a massively wealthy 'oil fund' now?
Where is Salmond with his claims of an oil-funded tartan nirvana, running multi-billion pound surpluses now?
His entire economic masterplan for an independent Scotland has turned to dust at the very first crisis.
And he still considers himself an 'economist'.
Complain about this comment
Re #68 Anglophone
- if there's one thing that really bugs me in all these debates, it's the inability of anyone on either side of the argument to present basic, comprehensive economic information. Nobody seems able to put together an unambiguous assessment of oil income versus public expenditure over time. They just selectively pick the years that prove whatever point that they are trying to make –
Quite !
So allow me to present some basic, comprehensive economic information for you
At the beginning of this year, USD 1.00 = 0.68 Euros
Therefore $60 per barrel for crude would exchange to 40.80 Euros per barrel
Yesterday, USD 1.00 = 0.79 Euros
Therefore $60 per barrel for crude would exchange to 47.40 Euros per barrel
So please explain to me how being in the Euro would have been a disadvantage.
If you want to pick a different time period, be my guest, but you will have to be very careful as there are only a couple of periods over the last five years where the Euro has been stronger against the dollar than it is now.
The key point you miss is not the relative exchange rates, it’s the stability of the Euro that makes it so attractive
I look forward to you disowning your argument and falling into agreement with me.
BTW, you can consider my jets to be very cool !
Complain about this comment
While perusing a copy of The Stars and Stripes published in France on February 8th, 1918 for members of the American Expeditionary Force, I was gobsmacked, as you say, in your inimitable way, to be confronted with an advertisement for a certain English bank, headquartered at 60 Lombard Street, EC3, which, although at the time, I think, without representation in Scotland, was drawing attention to the fact that it could then offer its services at five French branches: in Paris, Biarritz and Nice, naturally, following the English dosh of the day, and also at Le Havre and Bordeaux.
Here it was enterprisingly commending itself to the English-speaking world of the mud and bullets beyond the British lines so as to save their occupants from the inconvenience and indeed almost certain indignity of conducting banking transactions outside the safety of the English language in a non-Anglo-American establishment. Come to Lloyds Bank (France), they were invited, "a British bank conducted on British lines" and ipso facto not open, it seemed to suggest, to the suspicion to which the practices of any non-Anglo-American banking establishment must necessarily be subject.
How times change. I would rather deal with a French bank any day of the week. As for Lloyds TSB, ninety years on, it is, of course, a British bank now conducted into the firm embrace of the UK government, which has got it all geared up to crush what remains of its helpless victim, the Bank of Scotland. All enemies of this very British banking practice are mown down and swept aside, and complete surrender to the proposed anti-competitive English monolith is required. A very British practice, indeed.
Complain about this comment
#85 Reluctant-Expat
Shallow misrepresentation of the SNP case for independence concedes it.
In all markets prices rise and fall in response to changes in the economic environment, and this is fully taken into account by the SNP. Although the price of a barrel of crude now seems low in the present exceptional circumstances compared to the price to which it shot up alarmingly in the summer, it is still quite high compared to what it has mostly been in the present decade.
How unionists do resent the fact that the SNP economist First Minister of Scotland is the ablest political leader in this country.
Complain about this comment
79 Bluelaw
OK..would you prefer "irrational hyperbole" to rant? As fellow members of the Union I'm concerned for the welfare of Scots. If they wish to pursue seccession, as they are democratically entitled to then they should at least do it with their eyes open.
In particular, the whole business of voting AYE then sending Alec and his team of expert international negotiators out into the big bad world seems very dumb. If a decent referendum is to be held on this issue then some of this really big issues need to be addressed, at least on an "in principle" basis before being put to a vote.
Otherwise any vote will simply be dominated by parties on both sides putting up ogres to scare the children, probably leaving Alec's core constituency (people who treat the screenplay of Braveheart as a historical text) to hold sway...scary!
In the meantime I will continue to plug away on a part time basis because it's such fun. Oh...and because you must be worrying the other Nats with your "irrational hyperbole" ;-)
Complain about this comment
Scots may agree with English people on many many issues. That doesn't mean their interests don't diverge nor does it mean Scotland should be ruled by a majority English Parliament.
Complain about this comment
#75 - Within the EU, wealthy areas provide funding to poorer areas. So, you have to ask yourself, what is Ireland doing that we aren't?
Surely by highlighting how much more money we should have had by comparison you are making the case that an independent Scotland would get more EU loot? And that's got to be a good thing.
Complain about this comment
88 - absolutely - give me alex over any other UK politician any day of the week. I do think he should cut down on the pies though as it would be a shame to lose him early. Mind you, I feel the same about the BBC Scotland Political Editor...
Complain about this comment
86 Bloggger
Surely you're agreeing with me. You started off by asking me "it's oil dollars would buy less Euros...on what planet?"
I took this to mean that you didn't get the exchange rate link which was presumptive of me...sorry!
The example you choose does follow the relative strengthening of the dollar this year, but then again, the same calculation applies to the pound. A similar barrel of oil yields over 9 pounds more than it did in January, so what's the advantage again?
I'm not sure that I buy your notion that the Euro is magically more stable than other currencies over the long term. It doesn't as yet have much of a history on which to base assumptions. It was relatively depressed up until a couple of years ago but has now risen following the end of the protracted low-growth period afflicting Germany in particular.
Germany has recovered and the relative strength Euro is now posing a problem for Eurozone exporters. The pound is now depressed (rightly so) which will aid the UK in restoring growth just like in 1994. At the moment, unless you want to buy a huge number of Japanese DVD players, sterling is quite handily placed. This website carried a piece just a few days ago on the sudden onset of difficulties for German exporters. Mind you, they can't blame me...I've just bought a Siemens washing machine!
Complain about this comment
88 Frankly-Francophone a.k.a. Anglo-Saxophone a.k.a Greetings Earthlings
Well of course at the time the French Army had recently mutinied leaving parts of the French establishment in fear of being hung from the nearest lampost by demoralized and vengeful Poilus. It's possibe that members of the American Expeditionary Force could have been nervous of the French banking system at around this time and might just have preferred to deal with an English speaking bank.
Ah distant days. The pound was worth four dollars. Perhaps those naughty Americans were just happy to deal in a reserve currency rather than the fragile Franc.
Just a thought;-)
Oh I get it...you're trying to link an act of apparantly perfidious banking from Perfidious Albion to current events. Clever that!
Complain about this comment
91 T_Mike
Although he is easily capable of looking afer himself. What I think that expat was pointing out is that "that was then...this is now"
Ireland has come from a much lower economic base over the past 30 years, much the same as Spain which was the main beneficiary of EU loot at the time. Now of course there are new members and accession nations that are considerably poorer than Scotland and to assume that Scotland would be beneficiary on the scale of the RoI is a very big assumption.
Equally, with its oil revenues, Scotland might find itself being a net contributor. That would surely be the case using Alec's numbers.
Ironically, the remainder of the UK should in theory have its contributions reduced, but that is probably too much to hope.
Complain about this comment
I am slightly frightened to post into such a maelstrom of remarks as I have read above. However, I feel an urge to lob in a few facts and comments about oil:
Brent crude was below $50 for the entire decade up to May 2005. Oil's recent rise, commencing 2004, was based on medium term fundamentals of supply and demand (depletion, peak oil, growth in China and India etc) which haven't gone away at all; perhaps they have been pushed back by a year or two. Speculative money piled into the rising price as a sure fire one way bet (sound familiar?) until the bubble burst. Now you can be certain that speculative money betting on it falling (a sure fire one way bet...) has pushed it below trend. Take a look at a long term oil price chart. The outlook in a year or two, once the short selling bubble bursts, is $70 to $90.
With around 40% of Scottish oil still to be produced, at average price more than double in real terms of what the first 60% was produced at, the real fact of the matter is that MORE THAN HALF THE MONEY IS STILL IN THE GROUND. With UK treasury revenues to date of £240 billion at today's proces, that is likely to be roughly £300 billion over the next thirty years. Enough to pay for the Scottish NHS for thirty years, for example.
Oil of course isn't the key issue for Scotland anyway. Ireland seems to have done rather well without it. It is appropriate government policies which a country needs.
For one current example, Scottish domestic gas prices have gone up enormously recently. This is essentailly a response to the rises in the spot price paid to import gas into the UK, ensuring that the vendors don't sell any gas at a loss. However, Scotland does not actually import any gas - it produces six times as much as is used domestically and sends the rest to England and Ireland. So why exactly have Scottish prices gone up again?
And I see a couple of posters ask why we should believe that independence would be better than the union, 'without evidence'. Since a true controlled experiment is not possible without a parallel universe, the most relevant evidence is that from international comparison.
As an example, it is widely accepted that movements of people are an indicator of relative economic opportunity. (Ask any Poles you know.)
Population figures for 1900 and 2000:
Norway: 1900 - 2.2 million, 2000 - 4.5 million; increase 105%
Denmark: 1900 - 2.5 million, 2000 - 5.1 million; increase 104%
Sweden: 1900 - 5.1 million, 2000 - 9.1 million; increase 78%
Belgium: 1900 - 6.7 million, 2000 - 10.2 million; increase 52%
Netherlands: 1900 - 5.1 million, 2000 - 15.9 million; increase 212%
Scotland: 1900 – 4.4 million, 2000 - 5.1 million; increase 16%
England and Wales: 1900 - 32 million, 2000 - 52 million; increase 63%
Scotland's birthrate was slightly higher than Sweden's in that period. It isn't birthrate, it is all about emigration. Just compare those percentages again.
If you believe that represents the best possible outcome for Scotland, taken over a century, then your name must be Dr Pangloss.
Complain about this comment
Nothing irrational or hyperbolic about what I have posted. Stats and facts back me up.
If Scotland was sovereign and been treated the way she has been the UK would be before the UN over it.
Complain about this comment
88. "How unionists do resent the fact that the SNP economist First Minister of Scotland is the ablest political leader in this country."
LOL
Yes, that's what it is; 'resentment'.
Off you go back to the Herald/Scotsman, little one.
Complain about this comment
Yes, well done Ireland for showing just what a small independent country can achieve. Well done for becoming much richer per head than the UK. Signed: a west coast Scots Prod.
Complain about this comment
#85
Alex Salmond's credentials as an experienced and astute economist are, of course, well-established and well-evidenced.
Which is in open contrast to your personal brand of opportunistic, specious and manipulative propaganda.
Not to mention the dubiety of your claims to be notionally 'Scottish'!
Complain about this comment
Re Anglophone
Nice try, and the apology was a nice touch, but no cigar.
Lets have a look at what you have said:
From #68
At the moment oil is still traded globally in US Dollars (the current relative weakness of the dollar is one of the reasons why the price escalalted so rapidly last year). If you sell oil in comparatively weak dollars, then exchange those dollars for comparatively strong Euros so that they can be spent in Scotland you end up with less money. It's called exchange risk and it has always been around. Please trust me on this one.
From #93
The example you choose does follow the relative strengthening of the dollar this year, but then again, the same calculation applies to the pound. A similar barrel of oil yields over 9 pounds more than it did in January, so what's the advantage again?
Ok what is it to be, is the USD relatively weak as per your posting #68 or relatively strong in post #93 ? your argument was that we would suffer if we had Euros as our currency, as we would get less per barrel for oil, but I still don’t see it.
From #93
I'm not sure that I buy your notion that the Euro is magically more stable than other currencies over the long term. It doesn't as yet have much of a history on which to base assumptions. It was relatively depressed up until a couple of years ago but has now risen following the end of the protracted low-growth period afflicting Germany in particular.
Given your problems in understanding exchange rates, I’m not inclined to take your view on the stability of the Euro. I think if you were to do the work and understand the subject matter, you would find that there is nothing magical about the stability of the Euro, or the strength of the USD in the face of a recession
From #93
Germany has recovered and the relative strength Euro is now posing a problem for Eurozone exporters. The pound is now depressed (rightly so) which will aid the UK in restoring growth just like in 1994. At the moment, unless you want to buy a huge number of Japanese DVD players, sterling is quite handily placed. This website carried a piece just a few days ago on the sudden onset of difficulties for German exporters. Mind you, they can't blame me...I've just bought a Siemens washing machine!
Yes, it’s an interesting point, but you are glossing over the balance of payments and the impact of the weak pound. While it may help exporters, I am not aware of anyone who is predicting that the weakness of sterling is sufficient to turn around the long term current account deficit, and so as a society we are likely to suffer as a result of the weak pound. The reduction in our manufacturing base has put us on an inexorable course of being a significant net importer and so a weak pound will mean a greater cost to continue to provide products we need and use.
Complain about this comment
Why is it that Unionist posters feel the need to provoke ire from independence supporters with their continued tactic of 'predicting' responses.
Phrases like "I await the stampede from nats ..... " or "The nats will now respond ... ".
This is subtle provocation and should prevent the comment appearing.
Like someone who continually goads another with the words "hit me, come on I know you want to ..." then get's hit, it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
"I now await the usual Unionist response ......... well, you know the rest !!
Complain about this comment
Another young guest from the newspaper sites:
96. "With around 40% of Scottish oil still to be produced"
Okay.
1. You seem to have omitted that this "40%" is just a forecast based on 'best-case scenarios' and certainly NOT on 'known reserves'.
2. You have also omitted that oil production has been decreasing year-on-year since the 1999 peak, with levels already down to just 40% of that managed 8 years ago and with no sign of this year-on-year decrease ending.
Otherwise, I'm still trying to see any relevance to anything in the rest of your post. Changes in population between 1900 and 2000 is solely attributable to 'movement based on economic opportunity'? Surely not!
Next!
Complain about this comment
99/100. And the nationalists finally lose all that remains of their slender grip on reality.
Complain about this comment
#20
"To me the whole thing feels very rushed..."
Only because from time to time it gets caught in the slipstream of a glacier. :-)
Complain about this comment
#83 bluelaw
I think you need a reality check.
Tell me exactly how I will be personally better off in an independent Scotland.
How will I be financially better off?
Will health services be improved?
Will energy costs be substantially less?
Will there be a benefits safety net?
Will there be lower taxes and interest rates?
Will crime be lowered?
Will education for my children be improved?
Prove every point with fact.
That is what is needed to persuade people that independence is the right way to go.
Ranting about Scotland being ruled by a foreign power is basically mince.
Why is it that those with extreme views on both sides of the independence argument simply will not accept facts?
Complain about this comment
Just proving that I'm an no extremist as it were.
Complain about this comment
# 95 Anglophone - Thanks for the response. You are suggesting his point is retrospective but he says
"What could Scotland do with a ?2bn a year share of that windfall?"
surely you are as confused as I am? How is he suggesting we get our hands on this money?
# 98 Reluctant Expat - When you get tired of patronising other posters maybe you can come up with a list of 10 politicians in the UK today who are more capable that Salmond.
Bluelaw - An emerging independent nation from within the EU is without precedent and would not pass quietly.
"if Scotland took the decision not to be in the EU then that would be ours alone and no-one would have made that decision for us."
What is this, 1995? This is the kind of Jingoistic nonsense that gives nats a bad name.
Complain about this comment
Re #103. At Reluctant-Eight-year-old
-You seem to have omitted that this "40%" is just a forecast based on 'best-case scenarios' and certainly NOT on 'known reserves'-
Yes, you would of course like to use the P90 numbers for oil as it suits your purpose, but P50 (proven plus possible) is more generally held as a fairer view by people who are not rabid monster-raving loony unionists.
The 40 year quote comes from, I think you’ll find, a BBC investigation earlier this year, and unless Norway has nicked it all in the meantime, I think you’ll find it’s still there.
North Sea Oil is a bit like Mark Twain, the reports of it’s death have been greatly exaggerated, mostly by idiots who are keen to see Scotland as skint as possible.
P.S. Gordon (it wisnae me, it wis them big bad Americans) Broon has committed to prioritise investment in finding new more efficient methods of recovery (like everyone else in the World is already doing) to increase yields and bring old fields back on line to be productive. So much for peak oil !!
Oh yes, and while I am at it:
Your leader looks like Shrek
He’s grumpy and doesn’t know what he’s doing
He wisnae really funny in CiN mister
What an embarassment he is
Yes, your insightful comments and razor sharp wit are stunning – for an eight year old
Do you really think that “your guy looks ugly” is a reasoned political argument
Complain about this comment
#22
Surely that is a contradictory argument; after all, monetary and fiscal policy is a RESERVED MATTER!
boom boom!
Complain about this comment
#81 Reluctant-Expat
"and if anyone could find my post where I gave many examples, I would be most grateful"
Obey basic blog etiquette for a whole day and I'll not only find it for you but provide an explanation of why you didn't find it and the necessary workaround. It's a bug acknowledged by BBC support team in July.
#86 bloggger
"if there's one thing that really bugs me in all these debates, it's the inability of anyone on either side of the argument to present basic, comprehensive economic information"
Sadly, there's a very simple reason for that. It simply doesn't exist, and there won't even be a good basis on which to make reasoned guesstimates until the audited WGA accounts are published for the first time.
These have been successively delayed since they were first promised in '98. The current promise is for the '09/'10 tax year. If the Tories win the general election, expect them to be scrapped. If NuLab win, expect them to be delayed further due to the ongoing recession.
The only hope of getting them, and of bringing some transparency to HM Treasury is to get agreement on full fiscal autonomy, which would have to include the right of an independent audit. NuLab and their sycophants should be rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect, since they maintain that Scotland is currently being subsidised by the union, and will have the chance to prove it.
As this is a necessary step on the road to home rule, both SNP and LibDems should also applaud it. I can imagine the Tories being less keen, but all the more reason for NuLab to allow it to proceed as part of their "scorched earth" policy.
Complain about this comment
101 Bloggger
Ah Bloggger, yer jest getting rude now so perhaps you should follow Bill Clinton's advice on what to do with that cigar!
In the meantime, as we seem to be in passionate agreement on exchange rate risk there doesn't seem much more to say. I've been around long enough to see the pound fluctuate roughly between 1.02 to 2.10 against the dollar over several decades, all of which without the roof falling in so you'll forgive me if I'm not running around in a panic like those who were in short trousers last time there was a recession.
When you talk about the stability of the Euro in recession you must be using that wonderful crystal ball beloved of nationalists. The whole point is that the Euro has never been tested by a recession. If it comes through this one successfully, the case for the UK joining the Euro will be increased enormously.
You correctly raise the point in your last bit about the flip side of the weak pound being the impact on importers, what with imported goods being relatively much more expensive. That could be a good thing in the short term. Of course, as you rightly point out, the degradation of the productive side of the UK economy might have reached a point where there is nothing left to take up the demand. Time will tell.
Complain about this comment
Interesting article I just found about a private poll taken by Labour in the run-up to Glenrothes, showing Labour were well aware they were going to easily win. Particularly like this bit of slyness by the 'top brass':
The results of that canvass were kept to a group of five party top brass: the Prime Minister, Jim Murphy, the Scottish Secretary, Iain Gray, the Labour leader in the Scottish Parliament, Gordon Banks, the Glenrothes campaign manager, and Colin Smyth, the secretary of the Scottish Labour Party. They made a pact to tell no one else and, other than to say that the result would be “close”, were content to sit back and watch as the premature claims of victory from Alex Salmond and the SNP grew louder and louder, media pundits busied themselves estimating the Nationalist majority, the bookmakers installed the SNP as odds-on favourites and even Labour ministers and backbench MPs at Westminster prepared their defence for what they felt was certain to be another by-election defeat for Brown.
Brilliantly gave Salmond all the rope he needed to hang himself. Genius.
Has he re-surfaced yet or is the humiliation and/or realisation that he has again failed with this latest independence campaign too much for Shrek to bear?
111. What "basic blog etiquette"? Where is this written? Link?
Complain about this comment
#112 Anglophone
"that wonderful crystal ball beloved of nationalists"
as opposed to the "collection" of balls used by the other parties?
:-)
Complain about this comment
#111/#113 - I believe he is referring to good old fashioned Scottish manners.
You've obviously been an Expat for too long.
Complain about this comment
#112 Anglophone
"Ah Bloggger, yer jest getting rude now so perhaps you should follow Bill Clinton's advice on what to do with that cigar!"
Bloggger's comments are sweet reasonableness itself compared to your vitriol against entire nations. I note you have made no reply to my #297's complaints against your #148's scurrilous allegations against the Swiss on the Off the ball? thread.
"If it comes through this one successfully, the case for the UK joining the Euro will be increased enormously."
For once, we're in agreement, although I'm surprised you don't count the previous "snake" period, which did include a recession.
Complain about this comment
#113 Exultant-carpet
Just look at the posts of almost anyone but you when they reference the posts of others.
I'll grant that you're not quite as uncouth and crass as CEH on the NR threads, but it's a close-run thing.
"Interesting article I just found about a private poll taken by Labour in the run-up to Glenrothes"
As the Thunderer's article was on their main Politics page when you wrote your modest #5 on the Honeymoon ends, it doesn't say a great deal about your web navigation skills. Most public libraries have free help for beginners.
Complain about this comment
Ha - Iain Gray in the 'top brass' of the Labour Party ... he isn't even able to control what is going on in his own constituency party!
Not only has Salmond been out and about in public - laughing at himself as the Reverend I.M. Jolly for children in need, he took full responsibility for the unfortunate defeat in Glenrothes. That is called 'leadership', and most unionists wouldn't recognise it - just look at the current crop of opposition 'leaders' at Holyrood! I exclude Goldie from that, for obvious reasons: she is more a leader than Broon and Cameron put together ... shame for her is she is a Tory in Scotland.
Salmond is not a bunker-dweller like Brown who hides whenever things aren't going his way. Call him Shrek if you must but he has integrity, unlike all those who kowtow to our great (unelected) leader in Downing Street. What is his record now? One by-election victory out of 4 or 5?! Incidentally, when can the Scottish people (and the rest of the UK for that matter) expect an apology from Broon for leading us into the deepest recession in modern times, and what all financial institutions expect to be the longest-lasting downturn in Europe?
Complain about this comment
Re #112 Anglophone
Now, now, no need to start using language like that, Bill Clinton indeed !
Yes, I’ve also been around long enough not to expect the roof to fall in on GBP or the Euro, but given the economies behind the Euro, and the recent spectacular fall in GBP, I think the World has made its judgment, and it is in favour of the Euro.
Ah now, the crystal ball gazing and the Euro not having been tested in a recession, well as I said, you only have to look at the economies that are behind the Euro, they are not exactly new, and its performance this year to see that no crystal ball is required, either by me or the market makers around the World.
The Euro is a stable currency, in fact far more stable then GBP. Paw Broon and all his brainwashed acolytes can say what they want, but the World outside can see through it.
This is the fine line that all unionists have to tread, they want Scotland to be part of the UK union arguing that being part of something bigger is better and more secure, but they want to dismiss the idea of Scotland being independent within the European UNION.
I suspect that this is what motivated your original comment, but now you want to move it around to an argument about the strength of GBP, and away from the misinformation in your original post.
Sorry, but accusing me of fanciful speculation when you couldn’t even get your original assertion correct has no credibility.
Complain about this comment
Re #111 Brownedov
The quote you mention was actually Anglophones #68. I was responding to it, and included it for reference, but as I do not yet know how to use all the correct punctuation without getting a string of quesiton marks, my posts are sometimes a little confusing.
I really must find out how to use all the punctuation etc. so I can post in a clear way
Complain about this comment
118. So the leader of the SNP bravely took full responsibility for the SNP's utter failure to take Glenrothes the morning after the vote........and then he did a skit on CiN.
And that's it? One brief charity gig (a long-standing engagement, no doubt) but nothing else?
Oh yes, he's certainly hogging that limelight and seeking as much publicity now as he was before Glenrothes, that's for sure.
Complain about this comment
#115 t_mike
No - I expect bad manners from most unionists against anyone who supports home rule.
What I seriously object to is Exultant-carpet's almost invariable omission of the moniker of the poster whenver he refers to a previous post. Arguably, it's not needed at the beginning of a thread, but when you have even 20 posts on a thread it's a waste of effort to go back and check every number to see if it's one of your own that the latest diatribe is aimed at. You seem to forget yourself and do it about half the time but with Exultant-carpet it's over 90%.
I suspect he does it in the hope of getting the last word in on any particular spat.
Complain about this comment
I really don't believe Scottish accession will be that big a deal at all. Separatists will be buoyed no doubt but governments won't be compelled to act against Scotland and won't want to be seen to do so anyway. Quite the opposite as I expect Scotland to be embraced by the EU. And vetoing Scottish membership would be against the very principles of expansion the EU is founded upon. If anything the EU won't be looking to block Scottish membership they'll be looking to this as an opportunity to end perfidious Albion playing havoc with the European project.
Neil Small. For one thing we'll me be much richer as a nation. The economics are there. This will give Scots and Scotland a good basis to make everyone much better off and tackle the many problems that Scotland has and answer that list you presented. If you prefer Westminster failing and conniving and presenting this a dividend for us all then carry on. But don't expect me and others to remain quiet about such monumental stupidity.
Complain about this comment
117. As always, your riposte is as potent and punchy as a rabid snail.
Quite, quite devastating.
(And still clinging to that fantasy that you are a BBC moderator, I see. You get these Walter Mitty-types on every blog.)
Complain about this comment
#120 bloggger
OK - I realised that when I re-read it.
If you're getting punctuation turning up as ??s, you're probably editing in Microsoft Word and haven't switched off "smart quotes", which produce characters above ASCII 127.
For what works on these threads, see my #84 on the New ways into blogs thread and my #75 on the same thread containing more about HTML.
Complain about this comment
Brownedov
Remember RE must be feeling really upset at the moment.
Imagine how it must feel, having your name, address etc posted on the internet, when you had asked the party to be discreet.
Complain about this comment
116 Brownedov
Actually I did compose a piece as requested. Edited it and refined it until it was dripping with malice and vitriol from every exquisitely turned phrase...then promptly lost the whole thing and didn't have the strength to recreate it.
To summarise, my objection stems partly from selfish pique from an obnoxious citizen of said nation who was incredibly rude about us Brits at a party. This is in part cancelled out by some nice people I've met but, nonetheless two things do stick in my mind.
First it was a plant engineer at Hoffman la Roche who boasted of Swiss environmental and air quality standards to me. Indeed "there are no cars on the roads older than 3 years". "Where do the older polluting cars go?" I ask. "We sell them to Poland he replies....nice. Subsequently I have seen smoking cars polluting the streets of many Third World cities, still proudly bearing their CH sticker...sweet!
Secondly, again from having worked in Africa, particularly in Nigeria I just cannot square the poverty and misery I see there with the amount of money squirrelled away in "no questions asked" bank accounts in Zurich by so-called political elites. Perhaps Bluelaw should see this before he bangs on about poverty in Glasgow.
The knowledge that the proceeds of this industry allow the Swiss to enjoy a low tax lifestyle must surely make you a little queasy?
The original version was much better but I'm in a rush to pick up the kids.
Complain about this comment
#124 Exultant-carpet
"And still clinging to that fantasy that you are a BBC moderator, I see"
I'll leave it for others to decide who's on a fantasy trip. If you want help, you know how to get it. If not, keep on with the mindless ranting.
Complain about this comment
#127 Anglophone
Thanks - I'm sure that's more effective than your original would have been. You only have to look at some of the posts on this thread to realise that there are bad apples in every nation. I'm sorry you came across a Swiss one, but I assure you they're unusual.
The Hoffman la Roche techie was being economical with the truth. My diesel VW is 7 years old and few of my neighbours have new cars, but we all have a very stringent pollution control every other year. That said, second hand vehicles are often sold for export - the same is true of peeling D, DK and S stickers. I try to be fairly "green", but I don't see it's so awful for older vehicles to be used in this way when the alternative is likely to be an ox-cart.
Re banking, the EEA rules now apply, but I agree that it's not a legacy to be proud of. OTOH, in Africa nowadays the IFRC is still helping to heal some of the wounds us imperialists caused in the first place.
All in all, I think the average Swiss has rather fewer skeletons in his or her cupboard than the average citizen of the UK, US, Russia, France, Belgium, The Netherlands, Spain, Italy or Germany to name just a few. What that citizen is most certainly not is a Fascist, but someone who believes in democracy in a very practical way.
They're also more varied than you'd think from watching Die Schweizermaecher. There's still an element of truth there that makes it watchable as well as funny, but I have Serbian, Iranian and Tunisian born friends who have - admittedly after many years - become Swiss citizens.
Complain about this comment
#126 oldnat
Maybe so, although I'm beginning to suspect that your original idea of Exultant-carpet's being an MP might be correct but she's mislead us concerning her gender. Could it be the fragrant personage who is the subject of Brian's new Less than wonderful thread?
I think we should be told.
Complain about this comment
Re #125 Brownedov
Thanks for the info.
Complain about this comment
129 Brownedov
You're right in a sense of course. It's just that if you set yourself high environmental standards you should alsdo bear the costs. Old cars should be taken off the road and scrapped. If you believe that "you" should have good air quality but it's OK for brown skinned people in reassuringly distant places to have poor air quality, while at the same time saving "you" money...well then thats at type of hypocrisy and smugness that is hard to swallow.
Complain about this comment
#132 Anglophone
Point taken, although if the funds were redirected throughout the EEA to recycling the said vehicles, there would be even less available for third-world aid and transport costs would increase there. It would probably be happening with ex-UK vehicles too if a switch to driving on the right had been made at the same time as the Swedish one.
I think we're a long way off squaring that particular circle and when we do it will need to be done at an EEA or, preferably, global level. In the meantime, while you are entirely entitled to your view of the Swiss, I think you'd have to admit that calling them Fascist is rather OTT.
Complain about this comment
#126 LMAO........
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS