I put it to you . . .
Day Two of the hearing in the HBOS competition appeal. And how's it going?
The Merger Action Group, who're contesting the deal with Lloyds TSB, reckon they're getting at the very least a serious, substantive hearing from the bench at the Competition Appeal Tribunal.
HBOS says it is confident the appeal will be dismissed, describing the legal move as "an unhelpful and unnecessary distraction."
On Friday, we are due to learn whether HBOS shareholders back the merger with Lloyds TSB.
That means timing is crucial. If the appeal is granted, it means that the Tribunal is saying Lord Mandelson was wrong to set aside competition concerns raised by the Office of Fair Trading with regard to the potential merger.
In that case, I would anticipate that the UK Government would appeal. That would be heard by the Court of Session in Edinburgh - because the tribunal case is being conducted according to Scots Law, despite sitting in London.
The government - and the boards of the two banks - would be keen to expedite that issue before the Friday vote.
Court proceedings
On the other side, it's claimed that Friday's HBOS vote could become "meaningless", depending on the outcome of the court case.
Their logic is this. A swift, uncontested merger needed the UK Government to ignore competition concerns.
That was a fundamental part of the deal from the outset.
If, following court proceedings, competition concerns are now reactivated, then the initial logic behind merger fades or vanishes.
PS: May I draw the attention of the court (aka this blog) to the case of MacCormick and Another v The Lord Advocate (1953 SC 396)?
No, I haven't finally flipped in excitement at United's elevated league position. Hear me out.
You'll remember the stushie at the weekend when it was suggested that the UK Government might pursue costs against the Merger Action Group, should MAG lose the tribunal case.
Facing costs
Some interpreted this as a threat or unwarranted pressure. HMG said it was nothing of the sort. It was a sensible offer to save money.
And the 1953 case? That was when John MacCormick contested the right of the Queen to bill herself as Elizabeth II in Scotland.
Ian Hamilton QC, who was involved in the case, has now contacted the Merger Action Group, arguing that there should be no question of facing costs should their case fail.
He says that, after the MacCormick case failed, costs were moved for - but were refused.
Mr Hamilton (whose fascinating book on the Stone of Destiny I have recently finished re-reading) says that "the court is reluctant to award costs" in Scotland where people act in the public interest, even if unsuccessfully.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~34~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Brian
It makes it all very difficult for the small shareholder who can't get to the meeting on Friday. Bigger, ie Hbos + Lloyds, is better, but only if they're virtuous. Being big didn't save Citibank. Lloyds board may be virtuous now but so was RBS at one time. It doesn't seem possible to keep a virtuous board doing what they always have. They always want to go off and do something trendy.
Complain about this comment
If the new Lloyds group is anything as successful as HSBC, this shareholder and saver will be quite happy. I am also a shareholder and saver with RBS and I am royally pee'd off with the disastrous 'corporate imperialist' strategy that Board tried to pursue and then totally failed at.
With Lloyds, the BoS name is staying and many jobs will be retained at The Mound (every other bank is shedding staff so HBOS was going to end up doing the same whatever happened). I think this is the best deal of a bad lot.
Complain about this comment
To Reluctant - Expat:
It is not the best deal of a bad lot as the other deal was undermined by Westminster.
The bank is already safe, letting it remain independent is the best option, there is no need for a takeover. The takeover will lead to more jobs being lost than if the bank remains independent.
However, nice to see some coverage of this. Both The Herald and The Scotsman appear not to think it worthy of a high profile article.
The Scottish BBC news at 10:30 last night gave it all of 8 seconds of coverage. I haven't yet seen the Newsnight programme that followed.
This HBOS takeover and the conduct of Brown in the days preceding the collapse of the HBOS share price needs scrutiny.
Given that this involves an historc Scottish institution and the sizeable resultant job losses with the knock on effect on the Scottish economy, it simply beggars belief that our press appear indifferent.
Compare for a moment the feeding frenzy that was 'Trumpton'.
Just to remind you all, it revolved around a planning application that would lead to jobs coming to an area in need of such. The application had cross party support, objections were mainly from environmentalists.
The media treated us to headline after headline accusing Alex Salmond and civil servants of all sorts of misconduct without one shred of evidence. The papers gave this non story a profile and prominence second to none.
Contrast the Trump coverage with coverage of this HBOS takeor. A decision that will put in jeopordy the jobs of ten's of thousands of Scots, 100,000 if you believe the estimate of Jim Spowart.
Accusations of misconduct and dodgy dealings are rife with Spowart himself stating that he was warned not to discuss the matter of the Bank of China bid with the First Minister.
Gordon Brown was in talks with Lloyds some time before the share price took a hit. Information was leaked to Robert Peston of the BBC who revealed it prior to it's official release. Vast sums of money were madde by dealers in the moments before the official release of the information.
We had leaks of confidential business information from Jim Murphy
Now, this is without doubt infinitely more serious than the Trump story, yet our press turn a blind eye.
Complain about this comment
Obviously RE thinks he knows the future.
I don't anybody else, expert or otherwise, who isn't fully aware that there will be huge job losses in Scotland and Yorkshire after this merger and keeping the name and a tinpot office in Edinburgh hardly cuts it for me.
The recapitalisation means that HBOs could have remained independent but there is little doubt that his deal was planned by Labour a long time ago and the economic collapse came along to speed up the sell-out.
Scotland lost the Bank of Scotland anyway when it was absorbed by a Yorkshire building society a few years ago. This would never have happened if Scotland's interests were being protected by a proper Scottish Government and it is highly significant that the Australian owned Clydesdale Bank was protected from self-inflicted injury and greedy bosses by stringent Australian regulation of banking
Complain about this comment
It really is beyond belief that the politicians behind the scenes of this action would even contemplate a takeover by the Bank of China. It demonstrates a blatant disregard to preserving the Scottish interest and the Scottish jobs they have always said is their priority.
Complain about this comment
#4 snecked again.
I disagree that this would never have happened under an independent Scotland, since it is likely (note not definite!) that Scotland would have had relaxed financial legislation to allow the banks to compete on a global market, probably essential when you are a small country.
However, the fact is that we do not have an independent Scottish bank, so we must look to the future. I don't know if this is the best deal or not. Too much political interference from all sides has muddled the issue for me.
I'm sure that the Treasury had planned this all along. Alex Salmond's mistake was to keep changing tact, even if he was trying to act in the best interests.
But I refuse to listen to moans by shareholders. That is a risk you take with shares. They should be glad they are getting something at all, unlike those at Woolworths.
Complain about this comment
3. "It is not the best deal of a bad lot as the other deal was undermined by Westminster."
No, some opponents (incl SNP unsurprisingly) merely said it was "undermined" yet they provided no proof or quotes to back their claim up, just something about a letter which they wouldn't show to anyone.
"The bank is already safe, letting it remain independent is the best option, there is no need for a takeover. The takeover will lead to more jobs being lost than if the bank remains independent."
Nobody has said it was "safe". It's in dire need of financing which even proposed bail-outs will not be able to provide.
Complain about this comment
Mandelson should have walked over this one, already the man has been found to fundamentally undermine the ministerial rules (yet again). The idea of chasing a small public-spirited group for having the audacity to try and save jobs in Scotland and Yorkshire is frankly sick.
The UK Govt. has had an undue interest in this case, very definitely shaping the market to the average customer's disadvantage, ever since they offered to re-finance HBOS (effectively only as a part of Lloyds-TSB). This is pure politics and was taking place at the height of Jim Murphy's slur-throwing in Europe.
Complain about this comment
4. "....and it is highly significant that the Australian owned Clydesdale Bank was protected from self-inflicted injury and greedy bosses by stringent Australian regulation of banking."
Setting aside that the Clydesdale is barely 4% of the size of some of our other major banks, a niche player within a niche, don't forget that your Lord and Master was claiming LESS banking regulation as the answer just months before this all kicked off.
Complain about this comment
Up untill the merger was announced everybody(and that includes Mr Darling and the treasury stated that HBOS was a well run bank, that was not in trouble, fast forward 2 weeks and suddenly the bank had become a crumbling relic unable to tie its own shoelaces and in dire need of rescue(from a smaller bank, which actually requires a greater degree(%) of capitalisation than its larger counterpart) I am at a loss to understand why Mr Brown and Mr Darling are so keen to push this one through
Throughout this whole saga there has been serious misrepresentation from all invloved. This deal however it is presented should be about the long term and not the short as all scenarios point to.
Complain about this comment
Up untill the merger was announced everybody(and that includes Mr Darling and the treasury stated that HBOS was a well run bank, that was not in trouble, fast forward 2 weeks and suddenly the bank had become a crumbling relic unable to tie its own shoelaces and in dire need of rescue(from a smaller bank, which actually requires a greater degree(%) of capitalisation than its larger counterpart) I am at a loss to understand why Mr Brown and Mr Darling are so keen to push this one through, particularily when the largest impact will be felt in Darlings own constituency.
Throughout this whole saga there has been serious misrepresentation from all invloved. This deal however it is presented should be about the long term and not the short as all scenarios point to and that would lead to the serious loss of competition which our banking sector will find occurs afterwards.
Complain about this comment
Are you sitting in a cave, DGammie?
They may have been saying it was 'a well-run bank and not in any trouble' to avoid a NR-style run followed by a massively expensive NR-style nationalisation.
Complain about this comment
In Brown's dream vision there will be only one bank: the Bank of the New World Order. We will all be 'customers', whether we like it or not, and cash will be a mere memory.
He is absolutely loving this crash that he engineered, as it's giving the perfect cover for advancing his Common Purpose agenda to federalise the entire globe under a benign dictatorship of rolling eyed, finger steepling psuedo-Masonic zealots.
I only hope that Common Purpose doesn't manage to get enough boots on the ground to subvert our next (perhaps our last) national election.
Complain about this comment
Brian,
Not sure about your legal precedent re costs.
In the case of Holmehill Ltd vs. Scottish Ministers in 2006, a case related to a challenge of Ministers decision making in Land Reform legislation, there was a default position of loser pays, common in the application of Scots law.
In this case, a local community group with little funds whose case was described by Ministers as "...in the public interest but not significantly so..." was forced to pay the Governments costs. The same court ruled that it wasn't enough for a Governments decision to be wrong, in order to be challenged in court successfully, it had not simply to be wrong but to be PLAINLY wrong.
the law is always stacked against the wee people. If the Merger Action Group win this, I'd be stunned. If they lose and don't have to pay costs, I'd be even more surprised.
Complain about this comment
#12. Reluctant-Expat wrote:
"Are you sitting in a cave, DGammie?"
Do you have to be quite so rude, Expat? You could have made your point just as well without quite being so obnoxious.
Complain about this comment
REP.
Just how does your slavering of the Brown/Darling partnership blind you just so much??
'They may have been saying it was 'a well-run bank and not in any trouble' to avoid a NR-style run followed by a massively expensive NR-style nationalisation'.
The fact is that the B/D axis dealt this one out pf political expediency only, as it was designed to put one over the SNP bandwagon/honeymoon and to that extent it was partly successful.
HBOS did suffer an 'NR-style run' as you put it, as the City slickers and speculators got the scent of money to be made and the HBOS share price was ridden down while the basic banking business was no worse (and, indeed, and a lot better) than many others including NR.
So why the different treatment between NR and HBOS??
Quite simply, it suited Old Liebour to save one and not the other.
Story.
End of.
Complain about this comment
Reluctant, you miss my point.
Certainly no caves where I am sitting. It may not have been the best run bank in the world, however it has come to light since that Lloyds is in a worse state, the only difference being the share price. By your statement -
'They may have been saying it was 'a well-run bank and not in any trouble' to avoid a NR-style run followed by a massively expensive NR-style nationalisation.'- you admit you are unsure yourself, so why question me.. and you the shareholder, if only all others are as well informed as you. Though hopefully they will have the sense to look to the long term(and future recovery of the individual HBOS's share price) and the greater good of the economy rather than a quick buck...
Complain about this comment
15. Er, it was a reference to his two posts.
LOL
16. "The fact is that the B/D axis dealt this one out pf political expediency only, as it was designed to put one over the SNP bandwagon/honeymoon and to that extent it was partly successful."
Just because this is YOUR ill-informed, 'there's conspiracies against nationalism everywhere!'-fuelled opinion DOES NOT make your claim anything close to being a fact.
For your opinion to hold any water, you still need to explain why the boards of both banks plus all the shareholders are playing along with it.
Complain about this comment
16 REP one
'cause they were telt'!!
Understand now??
Complain about this comment
#15 irnbru_addict
"Do you have to be quite so rude, Expat?"
Is this a trick question?
Some things are immutably as they are with the degree of certainty that attaches to death and taxes and other disagreeable phenomena.
Complain about this comment
We all know MAG is going to lose this,no way is B&D going to back down,I agree with Grennockboy about the press and media cover about Trump,but something as important as this gets very little coverage is the unions going to start screaming when the jobs start to go and then blame the SNP for doing nothing.I wonder what Murphy,s new team he is setting up will have to say.
Complain about this comment
#2 .......keep telling yourself that, eventually you might even believe it yourself.
Complain about this comment
There are several things that strike me regarding this whole fiasco.
Firstly 3 of the UK's financial institutions have gone into foreign ownership in the last 12-18 months in the form of Abbey/A and L and part of B andB all sold to Santander. Nobody has uttered a word in their defence to keep them in the UK. Santander will no doubt be planning rationalisations of these institutions on the grounds of cost yet nobody cares or utters a word.
Now we take the case of HBOS, created from a merger of A Scottish Bank and an English Bank thus making it a UK bank headquartered and registered in Scotland. In comes another UK bank Lloyds TSB and we say no as Lloyds will shed jobs from HBOS and initially we said it would get rid of on old institution (I seem to remember the Lloyds name being quit old too).
Instead we would rather place it under UK government ownership (as majority shareholder) or let the Chinese have it! As such we will try and block said takeover and live in the dream that this over-resourced leviathan will not shed thousands of jobs anyway.
The joblosses will come from Lloyds TSB as well but we have conveniently forgotten that and decided that all joblosses will come from HBOS! and from Scotland.
And my final point for consideration is this, if job losses from HBOS will impact the Scottish economy so significantly does this not demonstrate a flaw in the Scottish Economy that so much of it revolves around a single industry and a single employer? Why is nobody questioning the Scottish Government with regards to this issue?
Complain about this comment
There are several things that strike me regarding this whole fiasco.
Firstly 3 of the UK's financial institutions have gone into foreign ownership in the last 12-18 months in the form of Abbey/A and L and part of B and B all sold to Santander. Nobody has uttered a word in their defence to keep them in the UK. Santander will no doubt be planning rationalisations of these institutions on the grounds of cost yet nobody cares or utters a word.
Now we take the case of HBOS, created from a merger of A Scottish Bank and an English Bank thus making it a UK bank headquartered and registered in Scotland. In comes another UK bank Lloyds TSB and we say no as Lloyds will shed jobs from HBOS and initially we said it would get rid of on old institution (I seem to remember the Lloyds name being quit old too).
Instead we would rather place it under UK government ownership (as majority shareholder) or let the Chinese have it! As such we will try and block said takeover and live in the dream that this over-resourced leviathan will not shed thousands of jobs anyway.
The joblosses will come from Lloyds TSB as well but we have conveniently forgotten that and decided that all joblosses will come from HBOS and from Scotland.
And my final point for consideration is this, if job losses from HBOS will impact the Scottish economy so significantly does this not demonstrate a flaw in the Scottish Economy that so much of it revolves around a single industry and a single employer? Why is nobody questioning the Scottish Government with regards to this issue?
Complain about this comment
There are several things that strike me regarding this whole fiasco.
Firstly 3 of the UKs financial institutions have gone into foreign ownership in the last 12-18 months in the form of Abbey/ A and L and part of B and B all sold to Santander. Nobody has uttered a word in their defence to keep them in the UK. Santander will no doubt be planning rationalisations of these institutions on the grounds of cost yet nobody cares or utters a word.
Now we take the case of HBOS, created from a merger of A Scottish Bank and an English Bank thus making it a UK bank headquartered and registered in Scotland. In comes another UK bank Lloyds TSB and we say no as Lloyds will shed jobs from HBOS and initially we said it would get rid of on old institution (I seem to remember the Lloyds name being quit old too).
Instead we would rather place it under UK government ownership (as majority shareholder) or let the Chinese have it As such we will try and block said takeover and live in the dream that this over-resourced leviathan will not shed thousands of jobs anyway.
The joblosses will come from Lloyds TSB as well but we have conveniently forgotten that and decided that all joblosses will come from HBOS and from Scotland.
And my final point for consideration is this, if job losses from HBOS will impact the Scottish economy so significantly does this not demonstrate a flaw in the Scottish Economy that so much of it revolves around a single industry and a single employer? Why is nobody questioning the Scottish Government with regards to this issue?
Complain about this comment
So we have Reluctant - Expat as the sole unionist who seeks to defend this takeover.
His reasons for doing so are spurious, leaving aside his own self interest he provides no additional justification.
Reluctant - Expat is wrong when he says:
"No, some opponents (incl SNP unsurprisingly) merely said it was "undermined" yet they provided no proof or quotes to back their claim up, just something about a letter which they wouldn't show to anyone."
Actually not just wrong but almost certainly trying to mislead other readers.
He reveals his agenda with the dig at the SNP, completely ignoring that fact that Unionists and Nationalists alike are against this takeover.
This poster simply refuses to acknowledge the wealth of evidence backing the claims that other deals were undermined and that discussions were well advanced prior to the run on shares.
Jim Spowart made it clear that confidential information was leaked by Jim Murphy, Spowart incidently is no supporter of independence.
Spowart also stated that he was warned by a Wesminster official that under no circumstances should he speak to Scotland's First Minister.
Information was leaked to Robert Peston on more than one occassion, this is a matter of record.
Talks on a possible takeover, involving Brown, were not made public, which would have suspended trading in the company shares. It was revealed that Brown had raised the subject of a takeover with the Lloyds chairman months earlier.
The Bank of China were reported to have backed away from the deal due to the leaking of information from the Treasury.
Sir Peter Burt has made it clear that the reasons given for continuing with this takeover no longer apply. The financial sector has been stabalised by the injection of capital by the Government.
Finally, only a fool would fail to acknowledge that the Scottish press have turned a blind eye to this episode when comparing it to Trump.
I challenge Reluctant - Expat to explain why a £1 billion planning application (that creates jobs) can attract such a plethora of anti SNP headlines with no evidence whatsoever whilst the taking over of one of Scotland's oldest financial institutions (that destroys jobs) is treated with indifference despite clear evidence that something is amiss.
Continuing to state that there is no evidence is to ignore the truth.
Complain about this comment
Lets try and get a few things that are in the air onto the ground!
1 - There is and never has been a second offer on the table, contemplation is not an offer, and it takes a lot to finance the running of a bank. It is right and proper to ensure that any bidder would have the finance in place.
2 - Why would an explicitly foreign bank be prefered to an at least on paper, British bank.
3 - Welcome to the world of Global finace, HBoS is about as Scottish as Morris Dancers.
4 - Markets are reliant on confidence, if at any point someone in a serious posistion had commented that a bank was close to failure, it would have been a self fulfilling provacy.
5 - Lessons were learned from Northern Rock, and the situation would have been drastically worse had there been a run on HBoS, action was needed and action was taken to protect the banking system from collapse.
6 - Scotlands Economic council believes the right moves were made.
7 - Finance available to a firm is dependant on its capital gearing (ratio of debt to equity). The MM theory is all well and good in theory, but in reality debt in an highly geared firm will cost more as it is more risky!
8 - Short selling is a run on shares, this effects share price not necessarily liquid capital.
9 - It's all about confidence, confidence, confidence!
10 - MAG is going to lose, because they are wrong! They no they don't have a real case and are just hanging on making headlines, what more can we expect from Alex Neil.
11 - Very much doubt when face with the collapse of the financial market the UK Government thought this will get one other the SNP, as much as they do like to think they are the middle of the universe.
12 - If it was a real issue, do you not think the national tory party would be making something of it! They must have serious grown up advisors who told them it was a non starter! It is only the SNP who are putting the Scottish economy at risk by undermining confidence.
I do not care about spelling and grammer, I'm hungry, have more work to do and life is to short!
Complain about this comment
#26 now now Greenockboy I think we should recognise Reluctant Expat's expertise in economics, Reluctant Expat is after all normally quite outstanding at being economical with the truth.
Complain about this comment
#23,#24 and #25 SimonAlderson
You appear to contend that there should be no particular concern over the threat to Edinburgh's position as a significant financial hub, as long as the jobs are transferred south of the Border, and not overseas??
Stretching to the bizarre, you claim that an economy dependent on the banking industry is somehow a peculiar Scottish 'flaw'!!??
Maybe if you post it often enough .... ?
Complain about this comment
freedjmac
What happened to HBOS is not a NR style run, at NR savers ran to withdraw their savings and thus the capital that underpinned the lending arm of its business. HBOS was made unstable by speculators shortselling stocks something that is very different. This was then further compounded by growing rumours that there corporate banking arm didn't actually know what bad debts were on the books. This lead to further drops in investor confidence and then ultimately the pension funds started to withdraw.
As for the media coverage that is so criticised, as has been pointed out previously a lot of the claims that have appeared one day only to fade away later haven't been supported by any decent documentation or evidence. Spowart no doubt hada study that said between 5,000 and 100,000, he was hardly going to use the 5,000 figure as it didn't serve his purpose.
If the media had jumped on this then no doubt that there would be those that would be complaining about the over nosy nature of the press. One day it will all come out some may be proved right others wrong, lets jut wait and see and stop creating conspiracies.
Complain about this comment
#Greenock boy.
The public get very upset about green issues.
The situation also had a wiff of sleaze about it, if we haven't learned anything from the media it's that they love a wiff of political sleaze.
I'm not saying Alex Salmond was in anway involved with sleaze, it just had a wiff.
Can you imagine the indicnation of Salmond if the UK Goverment decided to call in one of his decisions.
Finally you can surely see how any story involving Trump would cause a massive news story! The Capitalist riding rough shot over the commoner.
The thing just shouts press coverage!!!
While i may love my job, i'm afraid most people find economics and finance boring. They don't understand so don't really care, the ignorance of the masses is sometimes astounding! We just have to learn to deal with the fact that not everyone cares about the same subjects as us, as much as us.
Complain about this comment
No 30 Simon A.
Sorry but with this post you have just destroyed your own argument!!:
'withdraw their savings and thus the capital that underpinned the lending arm of its business.'
The story of NR and so many others is that they all leveraged their own (deposit) position many many and many multiples of times beyond their own capital base!!
There ain't no conspiracy here mate, unless, of course you are referring to GB/AD and Old Liebour - in which case you are absolutely right!!
Complain about this comment
The reason of HBOS was attacked by short seller is because it has the biggest funding gap in British banking system. The bank had over committed to lending during good time but when Lehman Brother bankrupt there is no more wholesale funding to tap on anymore however they are still committed by contract to provide lending to business signed in good time.
With low credit rating and high funding needs the borrowing cost for HBOS is just too high for the bank to survive. Combine with Lloyds’ best credit rating it gives HBOS a life line to hang on wholesale funding again and it may survive.
If the deal fails to follow, the most likely consequence is nationalisation because only government credit rating can give HBOS the ability to borrow money, even with recapitialisation by government it can not cover the vast funding gap, and government will demand safety hence nationalisation is highly likely. Maybe government will nationalise it and handover cheaply to other banks.
Now HBOS are surviving on the bridge loan provided by Lloyds and government liquidity support but if they can not borrow from the market with reasonable rate they will be insolvent very soon. Hope HBOS shareholder can realise the danger of fire playing.
Complain about this comment
this is not about banking this is purely political and purely brown showing his true colours. he was handed a chance to wreck the banking sector in Scotland and he grabbed it with both hands .
a chancellor - no
a chancer -most definitely.
he now has his hands on RBS - sorry the Nat west group .
and is days away from wiping out HBOS
no wonder that stupid grin has resurfaced.
" i will do everything in my power to keep the union "
he wasn't kidding was he !!!
Complain about this comment
#32 - Limited knowledge is a dangerous thing!
I'm afraid #30 argument is factually accurate!
Two different runs, both caused by lack of confidence. But both had a different cause and a different outcome, can you not understand that lessons where learned from one and this prevented the same thing happening twice! Paper run and cash run are not the same thing!!!
There are no conspirocies, just good economic and market judgement.
I would take comments more seriously if some people didn't use such words as Liebour, it seems very juvenile!
Complain about this comment
I have been a Bank of Scotland customer for many years and reading the blogs on here, I can't help thinking that I am the only person who wants to see the break up of the silly name HBOS.
I was against the merger with that silly yorkshire building society in 2001, and as a result of that merger, the Halifax nearly drove the Bank of Scotland out of existence.
I am not totally against the Lloyds TSB merger, if it means that the Bank of Scotland and halifax sever all ties, also that the Bank of Scotland gets rid of the stupid roll numbers they use(as a result of the merger with Halifax)
The Head office in the mound in my opinion will not have much power, as said in other posts, it will be a tin-pot office just to keep the country happy. The Lloyds Banking group will be registered in Scotland....BIG DEAL!!!!
My own preference would be an independant Bank of Scotland being a stand alone entity, but sadly in todays climate, thats not going to happen.
The Lloyds TSB merger is the best option of a bad bunch of options
Complain about this comment
I would describe myself as an SNP supporter, however I'm not a member but I am a former member of the Labour party. A couple of comments:
- Trumpton: this whole thing was started by Jack McConnell who wooed Trump to come here. Labour and their supporters are merely making political capital out of the situation in which they would have followed exactly the same line as the SNP currently, were they in power. The SNP would have made exactly the same political capital if they were in opposition.
In this, they are both hypocrites. the Liberals are just silly, don't know whether they oppose it or welcome it with open arms.
- HBOS et al: HBOS wasn't/isn't a Scottish bank. It's a stinking capitalist hell hole of mismanagement and ineptness. The UK government support of the merger with LloydsTSB leaves me incredulous. It is anti competitive in the extreme and labour will live to regret it because of the absolute havoc it will wreak as a near monopoly. It is a seriously anti working class move which will have a detrimental impact on virtually everyone whom it effects. A very few will make a lot of money from it, everyone else will get stuffed. Scottish/English/you name it.
Would independence have forestalled the banking collapse? Only if Scotland followed the same free market loving agenda of New Labour, the Icendic government etc.
An independent Scotland needs to have a nationalised banking system and nationalised utilities. That's the route to prevent the nonsense we've seen.
I like Alex Salmond but he won't do this. Tommy Sheridan for President of the independent Scottish Republic - nationalisation and group sex for all!!!
Complain about this comment
Reluctant - Expat disappears and up pops a hitherto unknown poster called SKaufman.
Reluctant - Expat says sarcastically "there's conspiracies against nationalism everywhere!"
SKaufman says "There are no conspiracies"
SKaufman argues that the Trump story was covered to the extent it was because there was a whiff of sleaze. So there we have it, justify the smear by using the smear itself, quite pathetic.
To suggest that all of the evidence I have listed with regards to HBOS should not receive at least the same coverage because the electorate don't understand it is the most ridiculous argument yet from Unionists.
SimonAlderson says:
"As for the media coverage that is so criticised, as has been pointed out previously a lot of the claims that have appeared one day only to fade away later haven't been supported by any decent documentation or evidence."
I repeat again, the press were happy to run a campaign on Trump with absolutely NO EVIDENCE, NONE, NIL.
We have statements here from Jim Spowart as well as PROOF of a series of leaks to the BBC's Robert Preston.
We also have confirmation that this takeover was being discussed MONTHS PRIOR to the run on shares.
I repeat, this takeover is unneccessary, totally unneccessary. It will lead to job losses many times greater than would be the case should the bank remain independent.
Why is Brown pushing this takeover?
Complain about this comment
With the recent (and long-overdue) growth in credit unions, we have a chance effectively to return to the good old days - with LOCAL savings banks (i.e. pre-TSB agglomeration save for Airdrie).
Credit unions are authorised by the FSA, and are no less safe than the multinational banks whose greed has got into the current sorry mess.
--
Peter Burt (who tried to tout himself as white knight) oversaw the dismantlement and eradication of everything that made the Bank of Scotland Scottish, and his appointment - following the great stewardship of Bruce Patullo - marked the beginning of the end for The Governor and Company of the Bank of Scotland.
Complain about this comment
#37, irnbru_addict:
"Tommy Sheridan for President of the independent Scottish Republic"
What are you mixing with the Irn Bru???
Or are you putting the case for remaining a part of the UK for evermore?
Complain about this comment
Bank of Scotland and RBS
What odds that, ten years from now, the Chairmen of those entities will be Messrs Darling and Brown respectively?
Complain about this comment
#Greenockboy - I don't know what to say, i'm not sure if you're saying I am expat, or i sound like expat! I'm afraid I'm a long time reader, occasional contributor. Unlike some i only like to comment on what i know about.
I think you will see that i never accused Salmond of Sleaze, i said it was a line that the media liked to follow!
I also think that to much time is put over to DIY and cooking programmes.
I'm still not sure what your evidence is, not sure about your knowledge of the legal system but hearsay is not permissable!
I also never said the media was right in their coverage, same as all the coverage about David Cameron and his drug taking habbits in is younger years. The media are wild animals, just impossible to control! Don't think it's may place to say they are wrong because the pick one issue over an other. They choose what they think the public want to know about, since they have that job and you don't i would be lead to believe they may know better!
There is and has never been PROOF of any offer apart from the one from Lloyds TSB. FACT FACT FACT
I'm guessing you know very little about economics and finance, just a guess maybe i'm wrong.
BUT, there is still a need for the takecover. The Gearing that HBOS currently has does not and will not attract anyother investment in present global circumstances. HBOS currently is nothing but a brand name. If HBOS went bust how many job losses then, who knows what would happen if Lloyds pull out! I can have a guess, the small confidence currently shown would disapear and the instituitional investors would pull out. Then pop goes the weasel, or in this case HBOS!
The markets are very complicated and are build on confidence, this a fundamental point that you need to understand.
The Gearing is the main point, HBOSs credit rating is shocking. They can not afford to raise finance from anywhere else, it is a case of do or die.
I don't mind being called a Unionist as I'm sure you don't mind being called a Seperatist. I don't see anything wrong with my posistion, the Union works well. Stronger together and all that!
Complain about this comment
Well, the hearing decision is expected tomorrow - good luck to the MAG six !!
At the time of writing, SKaufman has a comment immediately above awating moderation.
I'll let him have the last word as I don't think I need add anything to what I've already said.
Complain about this comment
#38 greenockboy
Sorry to contradict you, but SKaufman is actually not hitherto unknown, as s/he may be about to inform you.
Complain about this comment
#38 greenockboy
SKaufman is on record as being in favour of "the takecover" and has waxed lyrical about gearing before. Although a Labour supporter, as I recall, not unamenable to reason up to a point. Unlikely to be Expat, therefore.
Complain about this comment
I could take issue with virtually all of SKaufman's post line by line but won't bother. "Stronger together" How?
Unsubstantiated assertions don't qualify in debates.
Who exactly is stronger?
It is fairly apparent that across the whole range of national life in virtually every issue Scotland has got steadily weaker in vitusally every asperc inomparison to every comparable country since the SSW.
Complain about this comment
#40. The_Forfarian
Forfarian, you're arguing against Tommy Sheridan for President, what about the group sex, you against that too?
I digress, but my favourite political slogan of all time was seen on a T shirt of a rather imposing looking woman on the Glasgow anti Iraq march:
"Lesbians Against Bush"
Complain about this comment
I normally just feel like i get brushed over and ignored, it's nice to have some recognition, thanks guys.
#Sneckedagain, if you wish to take issue with my posts line by line, please do. Is it you won't bother because you can't find a constructive arguement.
Stronger together, how not? I won't accept unsubstantiated assertions.
Who exactly are you picking as a comparison? So you are going to argue that Scotland is behind where it was before the the Union? I'm afraid i feel a lot more advanced then that. Steadily weaker, what a nonsense comment!
#Maxanim, lets both be honest. What i write can not be called waxing lyrical, it's a car crash of spelling, grammer and punctuation. I do like a discussion on finance though, so if at anypoint you wish to have a discussion on it and the relative benefits of different models i would be more than happy.
I am male, and i guess you could call me a labour supporter! I also work somewhat in a finance orientated job. Now i have shamefully confessed my sins, we could create a support group! Maybe with help i could get over my flaws.
I would like to sign off for the night though by say, if the Seperatists had there i would feel a lot more lonely in the world of global captilism!
Complain about this comment
#46 sneckedagain
I am afraid that I have had to take SKaufman to task myself for unsubstantiated assertions. The unsubstantiated assertion is certainly a recurring weakness in his or her politically biased posts, whatever familiarity he or she may have with the dismal science.
#42 SKaufman
The assertion that we, whoever 'we' in this instance may be, are "Stronger together and all that!" most certainly does not deserve to be accepted unquestioningly, for I have witnessed myself the social and economic decline of Scotland over the past half century. The electorate of Glagow East benefited, or rather did not benefit, from a particularly and uncomfortably close view of it and have rendered their verdict accordingly.
You are hereby invited to visit a mapping website and take an aerial photographic view of, for instance, a gigantic wasteland stretching for acre after acre after acre from Dalmarnock Bridge in the Bridgeton area of Glasgow to Rutherglen. There is little to be seen there except wasteland. That wasteland represents what has happened to Scotland within the so-called strong togetherness of the UK over the past half centrury. That whole vast riverside area was occupied until the 1960s by industry, which provided very substantial employment. It is all gone. All of it. Those few buildings that are left are empty and decaying. Within the UK state none of that industry has been replaced, and none of the area which it occupied has been put to profitable use of any description that I am aware of, although that may gradually change as more power is returned to Scotland.
It is no wonder, therefore, that many people come to this discussion forum to argue that within the UK desolation, economic and social decline and emigration have been the portion of Scotland. In unity is strength, indeed. That is why Scotland needs to unite to repair the damage that has been inflicted upon it within the UK. That such extreme harm has befallen Scotland within the UK is sufficient reason in itself, one may not unreasonably submit, to argue that the very nature of the UK state is such that Scotland's best interests could hardly be worse served outside it and might well be better served outside it. The example of poor little Ireland, after all, is there for us to examine.
Complain about this comment
46
Should have read "virtually", "aspect",
"in comparison" and "SWW" (or WW2)
Get annoyed at the constant repetition of the utterly meaningless"stronger together" mantra.
By any objective judgement Scotland has steadily got weaker over the last 100 years and it is no compensation to be joined to a large, bloated world stage imposter which is in fact broke.
Complain about this comment
#46, sneckedagain:
"Unsubstantiated assertions don't qualify in debates."
BBC Parliament won't be worth watching if the parliamentary authorities get wind of this 'novel' notion - endless hours of old duffers (and duffesses) sitting in silence...
Complain about this comment
46. At 10:12pm on 09 Dec 2008, sneckedagain wrote:
It is fairly apparent that across the whole range of national life in virtually every issue Scotland has got steadily weaker in vitusally every asperc inomparison to every comparable country since the SSW.
---------------------
I think it would be fair to ask you to prove this assertion. I agree nothing is perfect but you cannot imply that somehow or other Scotland is suffering while the rest of the UK is prospering.
I wish people would stop comparing Scotland on it's own to other countries. Scotland is not fully independent and a fair chunk of a comparison is based on assumption:
eg
Scotland would have tight financial controls. I doubt it, as the banks would be unable to compete in the global market.
I've given up on the HBOS debate. In my opinion Labour have decided long ago on the merger and the SNP didn't know how to deal with this politically and now it is too late.
Another interesting story just surfaced is that Scotland may need to consider nuclear energy as the investment required to introduce renewable energy is massive. Of course the Scottish Government (ie SNP) responded immediately by saying no. What sort of government is this? If energy resource becomes a serious issue - possibly - are we then going to freeze in the dark. Governments must take contingency seriously. The amount of investment required is way above what Scotland can provide on its own.
Bear in mind that if Scotland goes independent, massive amounts of money will have to be ploughed into the administrative changes first.
Complain about this comment
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7774113.stm
Labour=Tories, how will Gordo and his many minions spin this Thatcherite plan?
Complain about this comment
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7774032.stm
"The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) also warned last week that the UK faces a 'severe' economic downturn in 2009.
The Paris-based body predicted that economic output in the UK will fall by 1.1% next year, more than any other major G7 country.
It added that unemployment in the UK will likely rise significantly to over 8% by end of 2009 from 5.5% in 2008."
Complain about this comment
#48 SKaufman
Very nice to hear from you again. Do forgive the waxing-lyrical reference to your references to gearing, which I am always happy to hear about, in fact. I do not underestimate the importance of taking it into account where appropriate.
Although not insensitive to infelicities of spelling, punctuation and grammar, incidentally, I for one appreciate that these in themselves do not necessarily invalidate a person's argument. Sometimes in such cases one's tolerance is stretched pretty far, however.
As you have confessed sins, I shall confess mine. Like others who have a lifetime of concern about Scotland's position in the UK, I abominate the term "Seperetists", however you care to spell it. The term 'separatist' does not describe me or advocates of Scottish independence generally. Its pejorative connotations are, of course, relished by those who defend the union with England, which resembles, to wax lyrical for an instant, the sort of union which a monkey urges on a banana. "Unite with me and all your troubles will be over." True enough. But it is not much of a union if you happen not to be the monkey.
Now you will be saying that I am trying to make a monkey of you. Why would I do that? All that I am trying to say is that there are those of us who are in favour of union that does not have such unfortunate consequences for the smaller participants in the union. Like others who post here, I favour independent Scottish membership of the European Union and the eurozone, in which the Republic of Ireland has prospered, deriving prosperity and strength in the unity of European partnership upon a fair and equitable basis.
Independent Scottish membership of the European Union and the eurozone will not separate Scotland from the UK entirely, provided that the UK joins the eurozone and does not leave the EU.
Complain about this comment
46. Sneckedagain: "Unsubstantiated assertions don't qualify in debates."
Did you actually think you could get away with that?
We shall start with this:
50. Sneckedagain: "By any objective judgement Scotland has steadily got weaker over the last 100 years and it is no compensation to be joined to a large, bloated world stage imposter which is in fact broke."
Maybe you could substantiate that assertion of yours?
Otherwise:
Maxanim: "The example of poor little Ireland, after all, is there for us to examine."
Is this the same Ireland that, despite decades of multi-billions in EU aid and subsidies (much paid by the net contributor that is the UK) was the first EU nation into full recession (which we still aren't in this so-called "broke" UK) and has seen its unemployment rate shoot up from 6.1% in Sept to 7.8% now (currently 5.8% in the UK and 4.7% in Scotland) and is predicted to be in double figures next year? The same country who's public deficit is already 7% of GDP and expected to be close to 9-10% next year, far higher than the UK's worst-case scenario for next year? The same one with Salmond swiftly dropped from his 'Arc of Prosperity' when its economy hit the rocks?
That Ireland?
Complain about this comment
Thinking more about it, I suggest Ireland should start looking to us for advice and guidance nowadays. It seems their economic model has gone a little wrong.
Complain about this comment
#49 maxanin
The fact that huge tracts of previously industrialised land stands unused is nothing to do with being part of the UK.
Neither is there anything to stop these areas from being developed right now.
Oh, maybe one thing - nobody wants to develop that land. Scotland - as with similar areas within the rest of the UK - is too expensive to compete with the likes of Korea, Poland, India, Malaysia, etc. where government incentive is high and labour plentiful, reliable and relatively cheap.
Heavy industry was not assassinated in the UK by the Government of the day, it died because it could not compete with the rest of the world.
If you think you can regenerate industry on those areas of Scottish 'wastelands' - go for it. There is nothing to stop you but economic reality.
Complain about this comment
As for Ireland, their economy has really gone down the pan recently. There is a high degree of concern in Ireland about the economic future and their dependency on Europe.
Cynically, the EU presidency is feeding this fear to bully the Irish into casting the 'right' vote in a new referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
I know it is politics and, as such the people do not matter, but does it not leave a bad taste in one's mouth?
Complain about this comment
Re Competition with far east.
I agree witht he comments about not trying to reinvent our heavy Industry, we will never compete with the far east where labour and life is cheap. Nor should we want to.
However we do need to produce things to buy things, simple economics. So when we look at economic development we ned to rediscover the Scottish and British skill for innovation and hard work. Look at the every day items we all use that were invented and developed in Scotland. The sad fact is most of them were developed in days gone buy.
So the challenge needs to be giving support innovative risk takers to develop an economy in the areas where we can compete, in technology and design as opposed to just manufacture. We need to encourage some types of manufacture, but only where we are not trying to compete on labour costs but on value added.
We also need at this point to take stock of our education system and asses if it is producing the skills the economy requires.
I support Labour policy on increased access to university, but only if the courses offered are of use to pushing the economy forward.
Far to many courses have little relevance to the world economy.
Complain about this comment
#60 - Northhighlander.
I would like to see innovation in areas such as recycling and renewable energy. Why on earth are we transporting waste plastic and paper to China when we could recycle the materials here? The resulting 'raw' materials could then be used for manufacture in the UK or exported as a valuable commodity. Likewise, we should be manufacturing high-quality solar arrays for water heating and solar panels for electricity generation(preferably using recycled materials!). Why do we import wind turbines for power generation? They are made in Germany for goodness' sake! Surely we can compete with Germany?
Rather than waste billions of pounds of taxpayer's money recapitalising banks, pour the money into the above with the aim of making the technology affordable and providing every household with some renewable capacity (flats might be a problem).
Sure, it would be a medium term plan, but it would provide a massive benefit to the economy, to British citizens and to the environment.
Complain about this comment
So, Reluctant - Expat would rather xenophobically attack Ireland than address the wealth of evidence suggesting underhand dealings relating to the HBOS takeover.
To suggest that the Irish cannot run their economy and in fact should look to Westminster for advice is insulting in the extreme.
The Irish economy has outperformed the UK economy for years. It enters the recession in better fettle than the UK and was able to ensure that it's banks remained in Ireland.
By all estimates it will come out of this recession in better fettle than the UK and probably earlier.
The UK is in the worst state of all developed countries bar none. Brown is panicking and is attempting to stave off the worst of this crisis until Spring is over. I believe he will call an election around that time.
Things are about to get very ugly in the UK, not least because of Brown's mismanagement of the economy. We are about to see a Union dividend hit Glasgow as our poor and vulnerable are targetted in an effort to trial the welfare reforms and save money.
Indeed, there will be a few thousand more guinea pigs available shuld the HBOS takeover succeed. One wonders what the people of Glenrothes will feel when they realise this.
It is even more disgusting when you consider that Scotland's contribution to the Treasury has increased this year and that we continue to give more than we receive.
Complain about this comment
I would just like to see this once-great engineering leviathan start to rebuild.
Taxbreaks for manufacturing throughout the north of the UK with the emphasis on getting back to building our own planes, trains and automobiles, tv's, computers etc.
We are already among the world leaders in bio-engineering and medicine, and a fast rising star in renewable energy technology. Let's capitalise on those strengths and dominate those sectors.
Get those tidal barrages built on the Severn, Thames and Wash and start scrapping our dirtier power stations. Build another barrage between Stranraer and Belfast, with road and rail along the top to link NI into the 'mainland' economy, and scrap all that need for nuclear power station replacements.
Extend the motorway network, especially the M1/A1 between Edinburgh and London. Improve the A9 and A90 to bring in our northern cities.
Build a high-speed line between London-Birmingham-Manchester-Leeds-Newcastle-Edinburgh-Glasgow-Belfast-Dublin.
That shiny new eco-city in the Emirates is being designed by a British architect around a revolutionary transport network designed in Britain, so let's build one or two here too. Plenty of room in the Borders and in Anglia with major capacity for wind and tidal (and solar in Anglia) energy production.
Agree with northhighlander; wind down irrelevant degrees which are all very attractive to those in search of 'any degree' and build up the courses that are vital to the economy such as IT, science, medicine, construction and engineering.
I would also like to see all govt laboratories (energy, transport, food, defence, space, health, science and their ilk) relocated to one site in the Midlands, perhaps on that high-speed line so within commuting distance of most of the UK's cities, their budgets increased and a new research hub for advanced science and innovation created. Get schoolchildren visiting from all over the country every day and get them to catch the scientific bug.
And to finish on a tangent: I'd like to see the UK PM stand in front of five flags, not just one, for press conferences; the four nations of the union and the Union flag itself, thank you very much.
Complain about this comment
62. So rather than...what was it you said, "xenophobically attack" Ireland, it's far better to "xenophobically attack" the UK?
You really are all over the place, aren't you Greenockboy, you utter balloon.
And yet MORE fabrication and exaggeration from the nationalists.
"It is even more disgusting when you consider that Scotland's contribution to the Treasury has increased this year and that we continue to give more than we receive."
Grow up. After a three month spike, oil now costs less than it did three years ago. Production levels are the lowest since the 70s and non-oil tax revenues are far lower than last year.
When Holyrood ran a multi-billion deficit last year, how, in the name of anyone who cares, are we suddenly running a surplus? Are you copying Salmond's methods and discounting billions in expenditure to get the answer you so desperately need?
As Sneckedagain said, "unsubstantiated assertions don't qualify in debates", so show your evidence (for once) or belt up with this childish nonsense once and for all.
Complain about this comment
Re 61
I agree with your points, in the Highlands we have a fabrication yard at Nigg that is curretnyl doing nothing but we still import turbines from Germany. Crazy!
Truth is though we have lost some of our skills in this market, we have failed to diversify where the Germans have. That comes down to government direction. In this country we have pushed towards a "knowledge economy" forgetting that we need to provide a living for all sectors of Society. Everybody can't work in a call centre!
I also agree with the recycling point. Re-cycling and decommissioning are future growth areas. Good opportunities for well paid employment. However in this country we risk missing out again. Our nuclear decommisioning is being farmed out by the government to the French and Americans, we could build an industry on doing this safely and efficiently. It has to be done, irrespective of any opinions on Nuclear power.
Also remember the ship decmissioning on Teeside? Some of the objections were based purely on emotion and ignorance, this type of work is best done in a highly regulated country like the UK, otherwise it is done where safety standards are not so good and people in developing countries suffer. I strongly dislike the "not in my backyard" brigade and we need to address this type of issue.
Complain about this comment
Expat,
"Thinking more about it, I suggest Ireland should start looking to us for advice and guidance nowadays. It seems their economic model has gone a little wrong."
Hilarious - tell us another one, maybe something about the Baltic States looking to Mother Russia!
Ireland will be back on its feet and outperforming Scotland in particular and the UK as a whole in next to no time. In contrast UK plc is going to suffer one of the deepest, longest recessions in Europe. Brought to you by the 'Anglo-Saxon' model which created this economic virus in the first place,
Complain about this comment
66. Yes, yes. Scotland is utterly useless and terrible, the worst country in the whole world and we're all doomed. Life totally sucks and it's never going to be better. We've heard it countless times from you now.
Whenever you feel confident, optimistic, or even slightly relieved that we're not in as much trouble as certain other countries, it's really good to know that there is always a Scottish nationalist around to bring you down with some made-up nonsense fresh from its poisoned and bitter little mind.
Complain about this comment
And meanwhile, a study by academics from Boston College (USA not Lincolnshire) has revealed that students in England have consistently outperformed those from Scotland in maths and science, improving their place in the international league table since the last results 4 years ago.
I'm not seeking to make any political points here, just surprised that it hasn't been mentioned on these blogs considering how many posts there are extolling everything Scottish over anything English, including education. Can it be we only highlight the things that support the argument that everything is improving under the SNP? Maybe the reason that HBOS got into trouble was because somebody in Edinburgh couldn't do the math?
Complain about this comment
I notice the SNP are excusing themselves from any involvement in this.
Falling crime figures are somehow down to them (how?). Unemployment lower than the UK average is somehow down to them (how?). Any and all new prisons are somehow down to them (how?). Any and all new schools are somehow down to them (how?). New roads and bridges are somehow down to them (how?). Above UK-average economic performance is somehow down to them (how?).....
But continued c-diff outbreaks in hospitals aren't and neither are recent drops in education results.
Strange that.
Complain about this comment
#68 MalcolmW2
"Maybe the reason that HBOS got into trouble was because somebody in Edinburgh couldn't do the math?"
We are constantly hearing that we should not think of HBOS as a Scottish bank for various reasons that are well understood. So why assume that its headquarters is entirely staffed by Scots? That is hardly likely to be the case where institutions are concerned which recruit throughout the UK, is it?
So if someone in Edinburgh could not do the math, as you put it, it can hardly be said to follow that that necessarily has something to do with Scottish education.
Complain about this comment
#Maxinim - I really do enjoy reading your comments, they actually make me smile and realise that sometimes it may be possible to debate policies.
I do apologise for my spelling i really do, i do not however apologise for the use of the term Separatist. I would like to consider myself a nationalist and a unionist, so the only differentiation between me and some one is pro-seperation is seperation of the United Kingdom. Forgive me because i have never known anything other than the UK as my national identity. So i think i am within my rights to identify them as seperatists, as being the opposite of some one who believes in unification.
I also don't understand independance within the EU, if the main aim is to plot your own future for Scotland how will this be possible. These are serious questions, i'm not trying to be silly.
Having grown up in a mining village/town that has gone through a painfull death i understand the hurt that can be felt by seeing proud neighbourhoods crumble. I take the regeneration of urban areas seriously, how can you build the people up though if all we do is knock them down. I like to think i've come a long way from where i started and i like to think my family are proud of me. It's my objection at be told i'm not going to be able to achieve something because of where i have come from that has got me where i am, and will get me where i want to go! A certain deputy preciding officer got the brunt of my chip, when he said it was people from estates who were the problem when it came to underage drinking!
I'll also make it clear that after some doubts i am also some what of a fan of the EU and look forward to further enlargement.
Complain about this comment
Sorry guys, i was meaning to spell check that first!
Complain about this comment
#58 youngerap
I do not recall stating anything about assassination. Nor was I referring only to heavy industry. There was a rich mix of small, medium and large enterprises of various kinds in the extensive area to which I referred. If you wish to introduce the concept of crime, that is a matter for you, with which I do not care to be associated.
The point that I would make is that no government of an independent Scotland could have afforded to allow such a state of affairs to develop and, like the government of the Irish Republic, would not have done so. It would have made use of the economic levers that the government of an independent state has at its disposal and would doubtless have done so in response to the requirements of the electorate to which it would have been responsible.
If there is an enormous area of comparable extreme and unconscionably enduring neglect of any description in the Republic of Ireland, we would all be interested, I am sure, in knowing where it is so that we might inspect it.
Complain about this comment
Reluctant - Expat's blood pressure has clearly risen as a result of reading comments that disagree with his.
Such is his anger that he has yet again resorted to posting lies and abuse.
Rather than engage this agitator I will simply point out that Scotland's diverse economy is responsible for the funding that finds it's way to the Treasury, not oil alone.
Scotland has been in fiscal surplus for years, see 'The Great Deception' for details.
The long term trend for oil is upwards and there is still around 50 - 100 years of reserves left in the North Sea, more to be extracted off the West coast of Shetland.
Scotland is more than capable of governing herself, no question. The Irish, Icelandics, Norwegians, Danes et al have demonstrated that small countries can survive.
The UK economic state is perilous, so much so that the poor and vulnerable are to be targetted in order to save money.
Scotland's contribution to the Treasury goes up and our most vulnerable receive a slap.
Glasgow has been confirmed as a testing ground for these welfare reforms. Now, where have we seen this kid of 'guinea pig' treatment before?
Yes, that's correct - the poll tax.
Which incidently, wasn't based on ability to pay, but handed the same bill to everyone, regardless of income.
Complain about this comment
73. Just how big an area is this "enormous area of extreme and unconscionably enduring neglect"?
0.5 sq mile?
Do you have any thoughts on whether it was made obsolete by other, more modern and better connected, industrial sites or are you blaming this squarely on the inability of a Scottish Government to use economic levers to keep it going?
What is going on at the site now? Are the old buildings still sitting there derelict or has it all been cleared away for redevelopment?
Complain about this comment
#70 sensible_chap
But that is exactly how these blogs work isn't it? Everything bad that happens in London at Westminster is the fault of the English (and therefore the Union) precisely because it is in London. When something goes wrong in Edinburgh however, it is not the fault of the Scots! Weird.
The point is, however it is dressed up, that an independent, international survey has found that education in England is outperforming education in Scotland on the key subjects of maths and science. (On that basis, it seems probable that any faulty sums were the product of a Scottish rather than English education, even if my original post was light hearted). Surely these are subjects that Scotland should be improving results in if she has any chance of making her way in the modern world? A neutral reader of these blogs would think that everything is rosy in Scotland save for those areas where she is being held back by the union. As education in Scotland has always been seperate from that in England that is clearly not so.
Complain about this comment
74. So when challenged to provide evidence to yet another of his unsubstantiated claim, Greenockboy again refuses. What a surprise.
Sorry, are you seriously using 'The Great Deception' as a source?! A bizarre report based on yet more unsubstantiated claims, drafted by a nationalist amateur which bears absolutely no similarity to any other figures or accounts published by anyone, not even the SNP's own GERS accounts from earlier this year?
The same report that claims Scotland should only be paying 900m towards the 35bn defence budget? That also claims we are somehow being saddled with the entire Trident bill instead of the MOD? (And these are only the most publicised examples of nonsensical tosh in that report.)
That document is an absolute joke, only accepted unchallenged as the irrefutable truth, by a small number of the most gullible and/or desperate nationalists.
(I wonder if this is the basis of your entire belief structure.....)
And, once again, the mere continuing existence of oil is NOT the issue. It's the level of production and the revenues it will bring in. Can you see that? Can you?
By your argument, turning the taps down so only a drop of oil is produced each day will mean the oil will last for another thousand years and therefore we absolutely could all be rich.
Nonsense, isn't it.
Complain about this comment
Why do all the unionists support the HBOS Lloyds TSB merger? Simple, it moves yet another Scottish head office to England, thus weakening the economy if Scotland were to become independent. Conspiracy theory, yes it is, but then look at the parcel of rogues in Westminster and say it's not possible!
Complain about this comment
R-E brings you more unsupported claims, abuse and attempts to flood the boards all alone. Pathetic.
Complain about this comment
#71 SKaufman
Sorry I couldn't get back to you earlier this evening.
I am so pleased that we can communicate without launching thermo-nuclear missiles at one another. How refreshing. A spell-checker is definitely worth considering, by the way. Try not to wear it out. I never use them myself, as none of them seems to be able to spell as well as I can.
As for the separatism thing, no apology is desired, merely understanding. To wish to separate one's country from a constitution which constitutes an obstacle to greater union can, of course, be viewed either way: as separatist or unionist or indeed as both. As the separation in question is a means to achieve membership of a larger union and also to engineer a rapprochement with the entity of which Scotland is currently a dissatisfied and disadvantaged member, as I would argue that it is, I claim to be essentially a unionist, a European Unionist, in spite of not being a British one, and make no apology for that.
On the subject of national identity, I am unaware of UK nationality, although the concept of UK citizenship is one with which I am quite familiar. It is unrealistic to suppose that the world at large considers your nationality to be UK. The world knows you as English by and large, whether you like it or not.
As for membership of the EU, that is quite a different kettle of fish from membership of the UK, as I am sure you know. For a country to be in the EU as a region of a member state, furthermore, is to be deprived of the decision-making and negotiating rights enjoyed by the central governments of member states. Why Scotland should be so generous as to cede all those rights to its southern neighbour in the present day and age and disadvantage itself in relation to both it and the Republic of Ireland among others seems to me to be peculiar rather than appropriate.
As for your remarks concerning sweeping generalizations about people's backgrounds, I believe we have stumbled across something on which we can agree to agree.
Enjoy your posting.
Complain about this comment
#76 MalcolmW2
I think that one has to accept that demography determines that UK institutions, including UK government, will tend to be English-dominated. Is there a Scottish university, for example, which does not have a preponderance of English teaching and administrative staff for that reason? I hasten to add that I am not expressing a view here but am merely drawing attention to what seem to me to be inescapable facts.
As for comparisons between Scottish and English education, I would have to take these with a grain of salt, I am afraid, having been educated in Scotland but having taught in England. If Scottish education really is now inferior to English education, however, we are indeed in trouble and the unionist parties which are responsible for this ought to be held to account for it.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS