Stop the press - we're in recession
UPDATE AT 1534:
More re the Budget. The UK government says the level of "efficiency saving" demanded from Scotland next year, 2010/11, works out at a net £366m.
That is calculated thus: - £392m as Scotland's share of GB efficiencies; plus £25m as Barnett consequential of new spending announced in the Budget. Adds up to - £367m.
Calculators in hand, Scottish Government sources don't dissent from that sum.
But they say you have to add on a further reduction of £129m as a consequence of the reprofiling of NHS capital spending.
And they say this sum takes no account of the further £9 billion of "efficiency savings" being sought by the Chancellor, post 2011.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Scotland is in recession. Whoah, there. Flash it on the News Channel. Hold the front page. Alert the Palace.
I would imagine you are less than surprised by the disclosure that brave Caledonia has joined the recessionary trend. But news it is, nonetheless.
For it was only today that Gross Domestic Product figures confirmed what the pooches in the precinct knew.
The statistical cycle means that, as of today, there have now been two successive quarters of shrinking output in Scotland. That is recession.
Also today, we learned unemployment has risen in Scotland. By 15,000 over the past year.
Again, there may be a tendency to let that brush past us. Credit crunch equals global crisis equals recession equals unemployment.
But think. That figure means 15,000 more people, 15,000 more families have faced or are continuing to face the real stresses and strains of economic downturn.
As the chancellor well understands, his Budget today will be judged according to whether it can ameliorate those figures and their comparators across the UK as a whole.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~06~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
The trouble, of course, is that most people will judge the budget on what it does for them as individuals, and not on whether it's the right economic strategy or not.
I expect our robust media to do its usual focus on Income Tax, Ciggies and Booze.
Complain about this comment
Morning to all north of the border!
What do you guys reckon the budget will mean for you? We're all fairly certain it will be the usual increases in fuel, beer, cigs etc and not much in actual substance or help
Have you been hit as hard with the recession in Scotland or have you been a bit more sheltered? Certainly in England it's hit hard - especially construction (most of my family are struggling for work)
I reckon this year will be good for you as with the weak pound more people will holiday in the UK instead of abroad
I can see the tourist industry having a good year this year. I will be among them at some point too!
Complain about this comment
Assuming I can get this html gubbins to workl -
This [On the IMF's apparent climbdown from its 13.4 percent GBP137 billion figure announced yesterday to a revised 9.1 oercent estimate] is interesting.
Complain about this comment
Good morning oldnat,
I suspect you're right on the cig's and booze comment. It's almost allways used to distract people's attention away from the fact that there isn't really much actual economic premise for the budget, let's face it revenues need to be generated quickly and the fastest way to do this is via tax increases
I actually think that a small (1%ish) increase in income tax would be a good thing. One penny in the pound wouldn't hurt the average family that much but would generate enough money to start helping the economy. The problem is that any revenue generated would be squandered on some useless social engineering project or just simply wasted!
Complain about this comment
# 3 Bandages_For_Konjic
Has the IMF ever made a mistake like this before? If it has then we will have to accept that it was a mistake. If it has not made a mistake like this before then one would be likely to think that it has not made a mistake and the figures may, indeed, be true. Interesting.
Complain about this comment
#4 mightychewster
If you haven't seen it, there's a good article on the economic failure of the UK (and others) by Hamish McRae in the Indy (I referred to it on the previous thread).
It's an excellent description of how governments (and especially the current UK one) have screwed up the economy because they didn't see the need for fiscal balance. The levels of the National Debt are so horrendous that taxes need to rise and spending cut, because of the hole that we're in.
Complain about this comment
Guys, go online.
There are lots of free resources and tools that will help you to make money and somehow cover your expenses.
Surely that is not easy and you should stay clear off "get rich quick" schemes, but lots of people during recession have made quite a living online.
Even without have a site or buying a domain.
I know what I saw because I can track my community which has one of the free tools that help people. Recession is making more and more people look for the new ways to make money and online money making is becoming a successful answer to many.
Meanwhile governments are doing their job, take care of YOURSELF. Do no wait until they create new job places for you.
Complain about this comment
4 MightyChewster
To paraphrase George Best
I spent most of the money on needless war, propping up banks and social-inclusiveness outreach co-ordinators...the rest I just squandered.
My line of work is deader than a dead thing, hence I have time to write silly pointless blogs.
Complain about this comment
#5 gedguy2 -
"Has the IMF ever made a mistake like this before?"
I don't know - possibly others might? - but my instinctive reaction, and I have to emphasise that this isn't based on anything other than gut feeling is that I wasn't surprised by the IMF's original figure whereas I am a little surprised by this reduction.
But the only sensible reaction is to accept that it is an honest mistake. Otherwise we'd be in the realms of suggesting that the IMF had, somehow, been leant on which I can't believe would be possible.
Complain about this comment
On the last thread there appeared a flurry of comments from a small number of Unionists attempting to suggest that Scotland’s fiscal state would be harmed if we were independent. These arguments are now out of date and will soon be joining those of the ‘flat earth society’ – the debate has moved on.
What we are witnessing now is the evidence that shows, not a Scotland being protected by being governed by Westminster, but a Scotland actively being harmed. The budget deficit is a damning indictment of the stewardship of Gordon Brown and his sidekick Darling. Vast amounts of money poured into the Threasury coffers as the banks were allowed to lend with impunity. The 'feelgood' factor led Brown to believe that he had masterminded a never ending 'land of milk and honey' – there will be "No more boom and bust".
How better to mark this new era of plenty than the status symol that all major cities covet, the Olympics. London and the South East of course has seen a never ending conveyor belt of huge capital projects, money is sucked from all over the UK to this ever hungry beast.
The Docklands Light Railway, The Dome, The London Eye, The Eurotunnel, The Tube and Crossrail, The Thames Barrier – and of course myriad of other road and building projects. The there's PFI, a mess that is still to be fully revealed. When 'drunk' on his own 'success' Brown also sold UK gold reserves at a ridiculously low price.
The collapse of banks in some developed countries, not all as Brown and the media would have you believe, has lifted a rock no-one dared look under. The mess that has been revealed has confirmed what some, not all, commentators have been saying for some time that Brown as chancellor was partying on the proceeds of a bubble.
Now, however, the well has dried up and we are left with the empty champagne bottles and a massive headache. Brown though as recently as January this year was still insisting that the UK was the "best placed" of all developed countries to withstand this election.
That lie will finally be nailed today when the true state of the UK's economy and fiscal deficit is laid bare. The UK is bankrupt, it has no money, even the much trumpetted saving of HBOS and RBS was made possible only by more borrowing. The irony here of course is that the borrowing could only be made at affordable rates because of the North Sea resources.
The ultimate irony surely, Scottish institutions almost go to the wall as a result of cavalier decisions taken by bank management. A cavalier approach made possible as a result of inadequate policing put in place by Gordon Brown. These institutions are then baled out using money borrowed against Scottish natural resources. HBOS is no longer headquartered in Scotland – a lose, lose situation for Scots. The Dunfermline Building Society of course was almost criminally forced into the hands of The Nationwide – another institution lost.
Remember, this is described by Unionists as a 'Union dividend'. Stand back for a second and ask yourselves – How can one of Europes major oil producing nations be left in such a defenceless state?
As we ponder the state of Scotland we take a look down South to find that billions have been made available to bale out London Olympic projects and English PFI projects that are now in trouble. The champagne's gone flat but still has to be paid for.
Meanwhile, Scotland looks forward to a reduction in her budget of 1 – 1.5 billion pounds. If that wasn’t enough, we learn that the rate of oil extraction from the North Sea is to be increased by 20%. Scotland’s natural resources are once again being used to help bale out a Union in crisis. This happened before during the Thatcher years when every single penny from North sea resources was used in order to prop up a bankrupt UK and pay people to stay on the dole.
Strangely, Gordon Brown stands in the commons today and accuses the tories of planning to introduce cuts, forgetting that he is also proposing the same cuts.
We are about to start the sorry cycle all over again with Scotland's young people seeing absolutely no benefit from the staggering natural resources of their nation. As their parents were in the eighties, this will be the new forgotten generation.
We are told that the budget will provide a guarantee of a job or training for all 16- to-24-year-olds unemployed for more than a year. This will no doubt be the line that the Scottish media will push as Jim Murphy and Iain Gray are wheeled out to tell all of Scotland how well we are doig under Labour and within the Union. However, those of us who remember 'Youth Opportunities', 'Job Creation' and other gimmicks from the eighties as well as Brown's 'New Deal' will know only too well that they won’t work.
Youngsters will receive no help for over a year, by that time many will have either left their town or fallen into bad habits. Some of course will manage to get a job, however even when times were apparently good then decent long term employment was scarce, therefore jobs will be transient, conditions not great and pay probably even lower than would have otherwise been the case.
We are in for another decade of rule from a London based Conservative party, who, unlike Labour, have no traditional voter base in Scotland. Even with many voters in Scotland Labour have treated Scotland appallingly this last two years since the SNP came to power. Labour offered absolutely no protection from the worst excesses of Thatcher, so we can expect more of the same when Cameron is in number 10.
If we want to avoid another generational calamity being inflicted on Scotland then we must ensure that we are represented by people who both understand Scotland and are willing to fight for her people.
The Unionists on this blog rarely if ever advocate a political party, they seem to define themselves by simply opposing independence. We must not allow the concerns of the Scottish electorate ever again to be placed in the hands of a mute and self serving UK and morally bankrupt Labour party.
Complain about this comment
#7
Aren't you the guy that's normally clogging my email acoount with promises of untold wealth for no effort?
You're wasting your time i'm afraid. There's no such thing in life - if you want it, go and earn it. No-one is going to give you it for free
Complain about this comment
6. It could be worse.
We could be in the hole that Iceland and Ireland are in. Imagine if we had followed their economic strategies....as Salmond suggested we should.
Imagine how much worse this situation would have been if we had removed "gold-plated banking regulations"....as Salmond suggested we should.
And even now, as we watch UK debt rocket, Salmond is demanding that he be allowed to add even more debt to Scotland's books.
And yet the SNP still let him speak in public!
Complain about this comment
3 Bandages....thingy
Always a hoot when all the apocolyptic doomsters who have predictably latched onto an isolated number as proof positive of their central tenet i.e. that the patriarchal, phallocentric capitalist model is in relentless decline...are proven wrong.
Much was made of the IMFs last report in which the UK is set to endure to the deepest, longest, worst (adjectives as required) recession. I read the report through as part of a piece of work, alongside other work by Item Club, the EU, Bundesbank, etc. The apparant plight of the UK was being judged in 10ths of one percent GDP growth and 3 months either way.
In real life distinctions like that are just experimental noise and should be ignored...unless of course you are hoping that your student union dreams of the collapse of the State are finally about to come true. Who says that Unionists simply clutch at straws?
As a final point you can't help but notice that the head of the IMF is French technocrat, who are known for their admiration of all things British and are in no way prone to sulking over historical events. I wasn't saying a word!
Complain about this comment
#10 greenockboy
I agree with most of your sentiments there. You do need a seperate government and a chance to shape your own future
As i've said before on Scottish independance: i'm all for it if that's what is decided after a referendum. It does need to be voted on though, a referendum first to get enough information so people can make an informed choice - and then a vote. It's the only democratic way to do it
Complain about this comment
Today is an important day,it's budget day, but more importantly we are a day closer to an election, an opportunity to rid our nation of those Westminster parasites.
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
#6 oldnat
An interesting read, thanks for the link. I agree it will take at least ten years to even start paying this debt down
I've never been into 'spending your way out of recession' as it has been tried in the past and never really worked properly
What we need to do is cut public costs and start to get rid of this chain around our necks, it will hurt for a generation but it needs to be done. Then we can look to growth again. How do you retrain the politicians though? You would think that history has taught us to avoid this kind of debt bubble but it would appear not
We need a new class of party/politician before this will become a reality
Complain about this comment
10. greenockboy: "What we are witnessing now is the evidence that shows, not a Scotland being protected by being governed by Westminster, but a Scotland actively being harmed."
Conveniently forgetting, as the nationalists persistently do, that over #500bn is been spent by that very same UK on bailing out Scottish corporate disasters and taking on their calamitous toxic debts.
That's four times larger than Scotland's entire GDP and 40% of that overall UK debt that the nationalists are wailing about.
(Oh look, he's trying that good old "Scotland is subsidising London" nonsense again. Something not even the SNP claims anymore.)
Complain about this comment
10 Geenockboy
The debate clearly has moved on, or rather back to the hoary old certainties of supposed exploitation and duplicity. The only reason that Scotland cannot strike out alone is that the UK government is about to steal all its sweets to pay for the Olympics...really!
You really have an amazing regard for the amount that the government can actually control the levers of the economy. The idea that the Government can force independent oil companies to raise production by 20% to sell into a market that is already in surplus shows once again how much you and other Leftie people's champions know about the oil industry, contract law and economics. The only thing that the Government can control is the licensing rounds and the license terms...the oilcos opt whether or not to participate
Oh yes...English managers and politicians drive Scottish financial institutions into foolish decisions. I can almost hear the sinister Old Etonian accent on the phone telling Fred Goodwin to buy ABN or the pictures would be published on YouTube;-)
Complain about this comment
Scotland now in Recession, what sherlock's came up with that head line! Pretty soon there be no more manufacturing left in this country, then what will the thousands of government, health and social services workers do? Someone has to generate the core wealth and it can only come from manufacturing something, somone wants to pay for! Fundemental basics! Gone are the days (well almost) where we could sail up the yanktsee with our gunboats, and systematically exploit another's indigenous wealth!
Complain about this comment
I've been reading some statistics concerning Scots public attitudes to devolution (given this issues increased importance given the recession) and past figures suprise me (genuinely) and was wondering whether anyone has more up to date figures than the following:
"The Scottish Parliament should be given more powers:
1999 dissagree: (including strongly so) 22%
but by 2003: 23% (why the rise? Even marginally.)"
It is also interesting in terms of the Labour-SNP trade-off in elections in Scotland:
"Devolved 1999: labour: 38.8 (constit. vote)
SNP: 28.6%, Changing to:
devolved 2003: Lab 34.6, SNP 23.8% (constit. again)
Has anyone more up to date figures than these. As I'm just trying to see if there are any stat recorded trends in attudes to further devolution and the SNP vs. Labour struggle (are they directly interdependent?)
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
17. Reluctant-Expat & others
I think the oil debate is rather a flogged horse, and not at the heart of the debate on whether Scotland can be independent anymore.
Oil is not the be-all and end all of the Independence argument, (or at least I, having talked to many Nats, understand that they do have other economic arguments to support seperation).
What I'd be interested in; if anyone can find the data; what the Scots total exports are (as a share of UK total exports) are. As its important to establish what a possible balance of trade might be, as this is far more relevant to possible Independence.
I for one don't believe the Scots economy is balanced enough, given its over-reliance upon expensive and unproductive public sector, and other than oil, whisky and woolie jumpers I fail to see what we have to export. Modern Tech, perhaps before the recession polished many of these smaller enterprises off.
Complain about this comment
Brown has just stated in the commons that there will bo no cuts to the Scottish budget on the contrary there will be a 2 billion pound increase.
Now, he is either telling the truth and Salmond is wrong when he talks of cuts or Brown is doing a 'Murphy'.
On the budget:
The USA blamed for starting the banking crisis due to the collapse of Lehman brothers.
Accelerated capital projects mentioned, one thinks of The Forth Bridge and asks why this the excellent suggestion put forward by the SNP was rejected out of hand.
"No country can insulate itself from world wide downturn" says Darling. Wrong, oil producing countries can and do - except one, SCOTLAND.
Darling lists those economies that will suffer worse this year than the UK - Japan, USA, Germany and Italy. What happened to the claim that only big countries could weather the economic storm? The USA is even bigger than the UK, so much for a countries size being proportional to the ability to protect itself.
Flexible 'New Deal', additional money on top of benefits. 'Slave wages' under another name. Massaging the jobless figures by compelling young people to work for less than the going rate.
Training and subsidies, to give young people training. Cue an emerging new industry as 'training centres' spring up around the country.
2000 pounds to scrap your 10 year old car and buy a new one. That will help almost no-one on low income or unemployed. This is a gimmick, nothing more.
Debt as a proportion of GDP is expected to rise to 79% by 2015. Borrowing this year is expected to go to 175 billion.
Income tax not increased (except for the highearners 'U' turn), but stealth taxes are:
Above index increase of 2p on petrol.
Alcohol duty up 2%
Tobacco up 2%
So, 9 billion of cuts announced, this will translate to around 1 billion cut in the Scottish block grant not the 2 billion increase that Brown stated in an answer to Angus McNeil.
Carbon capture mentioned by Darling with new funding for projects. Anyone remember when Labour effectively pulled the plug on the Peterhead Carbon capture plant? It was just after the SNP won the 2007 election.
Let's have the referendum, let's go for independence - we simply cannot do any worse than this.
Complain about this comment
Just watching Cameron savaging Brown and Darling.
Both Brown and Darling look sick, like chastised schoolboys - this is the end.
Complain about this comment
DeanTheTory:
There's a problem with many Unionists reasons against independence, and that's many Unionists arguements could also support handing the European Union further powers, or some arguements are also hypicritical considering the position the United Kingdom has got itself into.
You've suggested that the Scot's economy is not balanced enough, shall we compare this to the United Kingdom?
I believe we can see how well the United Kingdom's economy is balanced...
Do you not find yourself making exscuses as to why Scotland can't be independent?
I thought we were past this type of debate. i thought we were now talking what the Union can do or should be doing for Scotland, rather then hear reasons why Scotland can't make it on it's own...
Complain about this comment
#22 Dean,
Any suggestions as to WHY the Scottish economy isn't balanced ?
Why there is no heavy industry ? No Coal Mining ? Little manufacturing industry but a reliance on "intangibles" such as the Financial Services sector and "the service economy" ?
Just wondering, because I am sure that there are a few of us could maybe give you a few pointers.
Start Here, from the Battlefield Band.
(from memory so may not be 100% accurate)
"This Place has changed for good.
Your Economic Theories Said it would.
It's hard for us to understand
We can't give up our jobs the way we should"
"Our blood has stained the coal
We tunnelled deep inside the nation's soul
We matter more than pounds and pence
Your Economic Theories make no sense"
Nip through to Ravenscraig sometime. Or Maybe Linwood. Possibly go and take a boat trip up the Clyde and have a good look at where the shipyards were.
Your Economic Theories Make No Sense.
Complain about this comment
Less of the "separation" please, there are disparaging names for the current state of affairs too: subjugation and mere dictatorship of the majority for a start. Question is no longer is Scotland solvent, but is it less insolvent than Broon has made the UK as a whole thanks to "the union dividend" and his own spectacular financial incompetence.
Truth is no-one will know right where we are until a good time after the end of the recession, which could be some time.
#14, the trick with that idea would to be get fair media coverage for even a couple months, hard when even the beeb is all but openly against change and backing Liebour in Scotland. Never mind the print media!
Complain about this comment
23. If this 2bn increase is true, Salmond will have serious problems trying to spin something pro-independence out of the next GERS figures.
What is it now?
Existing multi-billion deficit + lower non-oil tax revenues + lower oil tax revenues + increased expenditure = an even bigger multi-billion deficit.
Never mind, the nationalists can always refer to the 'Great Deception' for a partisan rejuggling of the figures.
Complain about this comment
A recovery of 3.5% over 2011, New Labour are not kidding anyone. We need honesty in order to caluculate what measures are needed, and on what scale. But these 'optimistic' budgets merely mists up our ability to debate effective measures. The government need to accept the scale of the recession so we can go about properly sorting it out.
Interesting about the pension also, a 5% increase for pensions (i think) yet the cost of living as increased by 12-15%. Hardly real help is it?
Complain about this comment
26. Chiefy1724
"Nip through...Linwood."
Intransigent management and undemocratic militant trade unionism shut linwood down, not my economic theories.
Complain about this comment
23. And, astonishingly, I clearly need to point out the obvious yet again.
Greenockboy, for the countlessth time, much of those massive increases in borrowing and taxation have been caused by the #500bn that has been set aside by the evil and nasty UK to bail-out Scottish corporate failures.
Try bleating about a few million in lottery funding being temporarily diverted to the Olympics. That's the usual nationalist fall-back, isn't it?
Oh yes, Ireland (that economy that Salmond admires so much) has got to find #5bn in spending cuts and tax rises this year to placate a furious ECB. They also have had their debt rating reduced, with a further reduction expected later this year.
Whereas Scotland looks to be getting a 2bn increase (despite your desperate attempts to recalculate it into a 1bn reduction...which is still far smaller than Ireland's target).
Complain about this comment
Hi reluctant-expat,
Ref your no. 17.
Please note that the UK has not put a penny into saving "Scottish" banks. What the UK seems to have done is borrow money to prop up UK banks.
The almost bankrupt UK has no funds available to bail out anyone.
This begs the question, how was this money raised?
Since the UK was saved from disaster by borrowing from the IMF on the strength of the North Sea Oil revenues in the 70's, it would not be a surprize if, once more, the IMF has accepted the future North Sea Oil revenues as collateral for the new loans.
Further, it would not be obvious what else the UK government could use as collateral, I would appreciate your thoughts, expat.
If the UK government did use the North Sea Oil revenues as collateral, would a Scottish government not have been able to do the same using the same collateral?
Best wishes.
Complain about this comment
If there are any 16-24 yr olds out there looking for work there are plenty of jobs at McDonalds, Burger King and the like. Poor wages, treated like slaves, spoken to like you had something on your shoe.
Complain about this comment
31. Reluctant-Expat
I think you have hit the nail on the head. The SNP have now got the problem of finding a message on these new economic realities, one as successful as "its time" theme and arc of prosperity etc of two years ago.
The lack of this new message is why most cybernats increasingly resort to going on about the oil (the oil, the oil!, 1970's anyone?), or ignore the Scottish financial sectors reliance upon UK monies to prop it up (over and above Scottish budgetary resources apparently).
Complain about this comment
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090422-708368.html
Sounds like an election budget of sorts to me, will look in to details later today ... headline figure, everything and anything to keep people off unemployment figures etc ...
Seems Brown is trying to keep on running as the consequences wont catch up with him fully until after the next election ... seems he is still of the opinion he could win (expect feelers being sent out to the Liberal Democrats soon).
Complain about this comment
Reluctant Ex-Pat - I notice that you still haven't addressed my point on the previous post. Mind you, it does show that you fundementally misunderstand (or misrepresent) the GERS report both in terms of geographic share of oil wealth and normally means by which to assess short-term debt or surplus. Still, never mind.
I see your still pedalling the 'gold-plated regulation' stuff. How about the following:-
Has the media developed a communal case of amnesia? Gordon Brown stated in his 2002 Mansion House speech stated that:
"What you, as the City of London, have achieved for financial services we, as a government, now aspire to achieve for the whole economy."
Or from the same speech:
"Strengthening the competitive environment means attaining the highest standards in the provision of financial services and it is because of the issues raised on auditing, accounting and the regulation of financial services that in February we announced a thorough review of the UK's current regulatory arrangements for financial reporting and auditing which will make its initial report next month, and why - more generally - we have created a new standing committee on financial stability and the financial services authority - and I applaud Sir Howard Davies on the work he has done. "
Perhaps the 2006 version will show he has have learned the need for effective regulation of the financial markets? Or perhaps not:
"To meet the challenge of global markets we created a single unified FSA.
"In 2003, just at the time of a previous Mansion House speech, the Worldcom accounting scandal broke. And I will be honest with you, many who advised me including not a few newspapers, favoured a regulatory crackdown.
"I believe that we were right not to go down that road which in the United States led to Sarbannes-Oxley, and we were right to build upon our light touch system through the leadership of Sir Callum McCarthy - fair, proportionate, predictable and increasingly risk based. I know Sir Callum is committed to reducing regulatory administrative burdens and the National Audit Office will now look at the efficiency and value for money of our system."
That's the same FSA which couldn't even comprehend some of the more innovative financial vehicles, never mind regulate them.
Gordon Brown seems to have a thing about financial regulation. He hates it. Again from his 2006 speech: "Progress if we invest in and nurture the skills of the future, advance with light touch regulation, a competitive tax environment and flexibility."
By 2007 this has become "enhancing a risk based regulatory approach, as we did in resisting pressure for a British Sarbannes-Oxley after Enron and Worldcom"
I could go on but I think it is clear that, not only was GB Chancellor for all those years, he was an enthusiastic proponent of precisely the financial practises which caused our current financial and economic meltdown.
Complain about this comment
13 Anglophone
Just to prove how things change. The IMF's forcast for UK growth is now a dire -4.1%...but now not as bad as Germany or Japan!!!. Keep watching, the number you want will turn up soon
Complain about this comment
#30, Dean.
Touchy point, huh ?
I suggested Linwood, Ravenscraig et al simply as de facto physical examples of the large and gaping holes that UK governments of both Labour and Tory have left in both the physical and economic landscape of Scotland.
Your economic theories still make no sense.
I know.
I once believed them too.
Until I went into the Real World.
Complain about this comment
Reluctant-Expat:
#31.
"Greenockboy, for the countlessth time, much of those massive increases in borrowing and taxation have been caused by the #500bn that has been set aside by the evil and nasty UK to bail-out Scottish corporate failures."
The London Government borrowed, see the word, borrowed money in order to bail-out financial services which collapsed under the watch of our current Labour Government.
They were not Scottish corporate failures. Scotland had no power or responsibility when it came to these "failures".
and let's not forget the current London Government is expected to see a return for these same "failures".
"Try bleating about a few million in lottery funding being temporarily diverted to the Olympics. That's the usual nationalist fall-back, isn't it?"
It should be going the other way, under the Bernett Formula we should be seeing money being diverted to Scotland. The London Government does not wish to send a few millions pounds up north of the border for the CW Games which shows how wonderful our system works.
We don't get what we are entitled too, and unlike London we are unable to take funds from the rest of the country when we have attractions.
"Oh yes, Ireland (that economy that Salmond admires so much) has got to find #5bn in spending cuts and tax rises this year to placate a furious ECB. They also have had their debt rating reduced, with a further reduction expected later this year."
Ireland actually started off with lower taxes in the first place compared to the United Kingdom, but Ireland is an example of a country where management have failed.
It could and has happened worldwide, it's happening here in the United Kingdom.
It does not make a difference if Scotland were independent or not, we would still feel the effects for the problems the rest of the world has... but hey, at least if we were independent we could actually do something about it!
By the way is the 2 billion pounds increase going to be directly put into our grant so we can spend as we please?
Complain about this comment
#8 Anglophone
"My line of work is deader than a dead thing, hence I have time to write silly pointless blogs."
I don't know what your line of work is - promoting Gordon Brown T-shirts (they'd be red obviously and grow not shrink when dried out), trinkets and other memorabelia?
Anyway, always here to help ;-)
Here's a question for you to "pointlessly" blog on about:
Here's the Scottish budget being cut. And there's the UK govt. taking active measures to promote north sea oil exploration. How do you feel about that?
(It's odds on that I get a taking the P out of me answer, but I'll try.
If so, oldnat wants to know the same ;-)
Complain about this comment
26 Chiefy 78rpm
Chiefy...your memory is 100% defective. The song "We work the black seam" was written by none other than Rock plutocrat Sting on the Dance of the Blue Turtles album c.1983.
Sounds a bit less "right-on" than the Battlefield Band doesn't it. Presumably a bunch of uber-serious and meaningful copyright infringers
Complain about this comment
32. What on earth are you talking about 'collatoral for the IMF' for? The UK hasn't gone to the IMF.
And I hardly think 7bn in annual oil tax revenues is adequate collatoral for any loans the IMF would dish out anyway.
Iceland, one of those economies admired so much by Salmond, has gone to the IMF though.
But that happened a while ago now. Shortly after Salmond listed them in his 'Arc of Prosperity'. Sharp as a button, that one.
Complain about this comment
GBP2000 for a banger swap? Insisted on by Global! Presumably the latest manifestation of his British Jobs for German, French, Italian, Japanese, Spanish Workers policy.
Has he totally lost touch with reality?
The Emperor Broon fiddling, again, while Britain crashes.
And as for 3.5% increase in 2011 ... We're doomed, doomed I tell you.
Complain about this comment
38. Chiefy1724 wrote:
So you dissagree that Linnwood was shut down due to poor management-worker relations, and overly militant trades union action? Thats hardly moving yourself into the real world.
Byt as for economic theory, you can dissagree if you like, I'm not going to bother to try and defend them considering your clearly closed mind on the whoel subject (see your statement "Your economic theories still make no sense.")
Complain about this comment
#32 bob
I think the bailout money has come from selling government bonds on the gilts markets - this is normally where gov'ts get their borrowings from
We haven't had to go to the IMF (yet!) although it's not out of the question with this crowd in charge
I would imagine that a Scottish government could of course use the oil revenues as collateral for a loan but I don't think the terms would be great as it's not a guaranteed 100% safe resource. I think you would be better just selling gilts on the strength of the entire economy than hedging on one revenue stream
I do believe that the IMF loan in the 70's was loaned on the strength of future tax revenues and not on North Sea oil - but there's no hiding the fact that the oil money was used to support the unemployed etc during the Thatcher years - but it wasn't the sole base of the loan
Complain about this comment
23 Greenockboy
"No country can insulate itself from world wide downturn" says Darling. Wrong, oil producing countries can and do - except one, SCOTLAND."
Don't tell me...say it often enough and it will become true. Now leave your Glasgow lair and visit Saudi-Arabia, Nigeria, Indonesia, Russia, Equatorial Guinea, Venezuela, Angola, Cameroon etc etc and explain to them precisely how they are escaping the global recession because they have oil that is worth 30% of what it was a year ago. I'm sure that their public finances, economic plans and social programmes are just peachy right now.
It was drivel the first time you said it. It doesn't improve with repetition.
Complain about this comment
Chiefy1724 re your 26.
Any suggestions as to WHY the Scottish economy isn't balanced ?
Chiefy let me answer you as Dean will not.
Thatcher using a financial policy someone read out of a book for her.
greenockboy, very good posts, just ignore re/AM2. Do not give him the oxygen of publicity.
Complain about this comment
#33 rickyross3359:
"Poor wages, treated like slaves, spoken to like you had something on your shoe."
Not a lot that government can do about the last, but I view the single greatest achievement of New Labour - and something for which EVERYONE should be thankful - to have been the introduction of the National Minimum Wage.
Notwithstanding all that came later, the removal of the iniquity that had even the United States of America placing a greater notional value upon the labours of the 'dregs of society' was a further step towards the much-needed civilisation of the West - even Gandhi might have smiled.
Complain about this comment
#17 Reluctant-Expat
You will peddle your distortions.
RBS for example, was one of the major international players - making similar mistakes to AIG in the US.
When the US Government bailed out AIG, it took a conscious decision to allow it's tax dollars to go to foreign banks as well (Barclays for example got $8.5 billion). It didn't have to, but decided that the long term benefit to the US economy was worth it.
The RBS group is only a single entity because of the existence of the UK - Nat West already operates under a separate banking licence. Had Scotland been independent, it would not have been operating in England as anything other than Nat West. It is up to each country to decide which banks can operate in its country, and which will also work within it's guarantee system - as India's ICICI operates within the UK.
Banking, as with most things, seems too complex for you to comprehend, so you grab a couple of propaganda points, and post as if you understand them.
Complain about this comment
Hi Reluctant-Expat,
Can you say where the UK has borrowed the money from and what it has used as collateral?
Best wishes.
Complain about this comment
39 Thomas Porter
"The London Government borrowed, see the word, borrowed money in order to bail-out financial services which collapsed under the watch of our current Labour Government."
That would be the Royal Bank of Scotland and HBOS, both headquartered in Edinburgh would it? The current Nat volte-face in making these suddenly English institutions with ceremonial Edinburgh nameplates is just a wee bit pathetic.
As they say in boxing...you don't lead with either your left or your right. You seem to lead with your chin!
Complain about this comment
DeanTheTory:
#34.
"The lack of this new message is why most cybernats increasingly resort to going on about the oil (the oil, the oil!, 1970's anyone?), or ignore the Scottish financial sectors reliance upon UK monies to prop it up (over and above Scottish budgetary resources apparently)."
The oil industry still remains important to Scotland, how many are employed thanks to the industry? How much wealth does it bring to Scotland?
If you find these out, then you will know, oil is important.
However do not fall into Expats way of thinking. The financial services relies on money that was borrowed, and last but not least Scotland was not responsible for the financial state because Gordon Brown and Co was responsible for regulations.
This was a failure on Brown's part, it was not Scotland's.
There is also no evidence whatsoever that would show Scotland in a far difficult position - without British 'support'
There are two cases though, Norway or Iceland.
It is fair and perfectly reasonable to assume that Scotland could have went down either path.
This is what you call a reasonable and balanced opinion.
But don't blame Scotland for financial issues that were outwith her control.
That's not reasonable nor balanced.
Complain about this comment
The reason oil requires to be mentioned only because the North Sea resources were uniquely placed in a special accounting category, instead of being allocated to the normal geographic "region" of the UK.
This was done specifically to ensure that oil was artificially kept out of the Scottish revenue estimates.
Complain about this comment
51. Anglophone
That would be HBOS also headquartered in Halifax with a largely English board an English CEO and director too?
Complain about this comment
I thought Japan and Germany stored money away for a rainy day?
I could be wrong, but if this is the case then what's the problem with both economies doing poorer then Britain's, they can afford to buy their way out of recession and will be better inm the long-term rather then Britain would will always be putting money away in order to pay for debts.
I could be wrong.
Complain about this comment
52. Thomas_Porter
"the Scottish financial sectors reliance upon UK monies to prop it up (over and above Scottish budgetary resources apparently)."
So you believe that it is blaiming Scotland to highlight that as an independent nation we couldnt have covered the cost caused by the banking crisis?
Scotland would have had to somehow find the money to cover the RBS crisis & HBOS crisis whether we regulated heavier than ireland or not, because its as Oldnat pointed out the RBS is global and would have suffered from exposures it had in its porfolios from China. So by saying that we wouldnt have suffered as badly as Ireland and Iceland because we might have regulated better is missing the point that the RBS would still have needed the bailout given its international size. And my point is Scotland wouldnt have been able to cover it as the UK has been able to do.
That is hardly blaiming Scotland for things outwith her control (I dont know why but she seems right when refering to Scotland :), its the romantic in me). It would still have been outwith her control independent or not, because of the size and scale of the RBS.
Complain about this comment
Anglophone:
#51.
"That would be the Royal Bank of Scotland and HBOS, both headquartered in Edinburgh would it? The current Nat volte-face in making these suddenly English institutions with ceremonial Edinburgh nameplates is just a wee bit pathetic."
I've never accepted RBS, HBOS or otherbanking services as either Scottish or English, I have accepted them as either British or Scottish-English banking services.
Scotland was not responsible or had the power to deal with the banking services in Scotland, and each banking service played by the rules which Gordon Brown created.
It's Broon's fault that we are in the position that we are, the person who had the ability to change regulations but never.
It's rather pathetic that you choose to blame Scotland for something outwith our control.
But I guess it's in your blood. Being different, n all from the rest of us. It's easier to blame someone else, and in your case it's easier to blame someone to advance your own political objectives, or in this case lack of objectives because you feel that you have never been treated equally, and we Scot's have it all!
Complain about this comment
49. Oh dear, I'm not the one that is struggling with events in the banking world, it seems.
Barclays received that $8.5bn from AIG, not the US Treasury, as part-restitution of AIG's insurance obligations to the bank.
It was financed by US bail-out funding but it was not a US bail-out of Barclays or even Barclays' US operations.
Do you see and understand the difference there, oldnat?
Mmm?
Complain about this comment
#50 bobbishop
See #45
The money has been raised by selling gilts on the international markets. The gilts are gov't issued paper which is backed by the tax payer - so basically the money is loaned on the back of future tax revenues
That future revenues will contain some input from North Sea oil but also from income tax streams from all parts of the UK (Scotland included) so we are all paying for it
Hope that answers your question??
Complain about this comment
#31 Expat
Please . Not the "Scottish" Banks again.
Tell me in what way HBOS or RBS were Scottish more than British, or Global (to use Gordon's favourite word) organisations
Ownership? - were more than 50% shares scottish owned? Absolutely Not.
Employees? - were more than 50% of their employess Scottish or based in Scotland? No.
Assets? - were more than 50% of their Assests Scottish based? No.
No to all of the above.
Perhaps you're basing your assertion on the companies names then? Very good.
OK so these British banks then. What exactly did Gordon save?
Shareholder value? - No
Scottish Based Jobs? - Looks unlikely with major consolidation and back office relocation to London in HBOS case certainly
London Jobs? - likely to be hit hard, but somewhat lessened by the consolidation/ relocation of previously Scottish back office jobs.
So far from saving Scottish Banks, Brown has further centralised (to London) the jobs and value creation of previously British / Global banking institutions that happened to have the word Scotland in their name.
Oh yes - and we'll be paying him for that particular privelege.
Thanks now. Move along.
Complain about this comment
DeanTheTory:
#56.
"So you believe that it is blaming Scotland to highlight that as an independent nation we couldnt have covered the cost caused by the banking crisis?"
You are using our current situation as a reason why Scotland should be independent.
However why have you assumed we would have followed the same path in which the United Kingdom has?
If Scotland were independent a year before the credit crunch, we would be an Iceland, if we were independent decades ago we could be a Norway!
However Scotland is not Independent, Scotland has no control over the financial services.
That's the reality of the situation.
"Scotland would have had to somehow find the money to cover the RBS crisis & HBOS crisis whether we regulated heavier than ireland or not, because its as Oldnat pointed out the RBS is global and would have suffered from exposures it had in its porfolios from China. So by saying that we wouldnt have suffered as badly as Ireland and Iceland because we might have regulated better is missing the point that the RBS would still have needed the bailout given its international size. And my point is Scotland wouldnt have been able to cover it as the UK has been able to do."
Have you asked the question yet, why Clydesdale (owned by Austraila) are doing reasonabley well at the moment (better then the other banks)?
Please research this yourself, then you will see your comment above to be ridiculous and shows you do not understand the system and how it works.
Of course. I do have another interesting point that I shall bring up (using your logic), if a country which houses a large international banking service, then how do you propose that country controls the bank in order to protect the economy, and taxpayers of that country?
In your comment you almost imply that it be impossible to do.
But then... not all banks around the world have been open to the credit crunch quite as much as those in Britain, question, why?
;-)
Complain about this comment
Simple sports analogy,
"Hello class and welcome to Unionism 101,
Now repeat after me,
When we lose we're Scotland,
When we win we're Britain.
Again: When we lose we're Scotland,
When we win we're Britain.
Congratulations, thats two repetitions:
You all pass with A's,
Now don't even think of leaving the building,
We don't want you appearing on the unemployement stats do we?!
Miss Alexander's class on how to fiddle your expenses is just starting next door."
The idea that Britain had the money to bail out the banks is ludicruous it borrowed it, just as an independent Scotland would have, on the very same collateral.
Also, Norway the closest comparative country to Scotland released money from its oil fund (built up in around a decade) to buy up undervalued assets in Britain (and other harder hit countries).
As to IMF point, G20 Summit was effectively prep, loosening the rules to make it easier (and less punitive) for "big" countries like Britain, Italy and others to go to the IMF later if need be. Don't expect Broon to be the one doing it, of course, he will be long gone by that stage...
Complain about this comment
No-one seems to offer an alternative to the current financil mess? however I do take issue with those who raise the question, in these difficult times.
With so much borrowing, why is the government now! ring fencing certain public sector areas and doing so, accepting that unemployment will rise above 3million by the end of 2009.
Events, events. If only we could see around the corner.
Complain about this comment
40 Aye-Write
To resume our correspondance. I will try my best. Firstly, I don't think that the Scottish budget is being cut now is it? Should make for some angry rhetoric.
My line of work is the oil & gas business and, without getting too puffed up, I really do know about this, so I will try to answer as best I can...albeit a few years since I worked on North Sea projects. I'm not trying to take the P out of you or be patronising but here goes.
The offshore is governed by a licensing system under which areas are leased to oil companies for exploration and development. New acreage or, increasingly, acreage that has been relinquished by another company is effectively put up for auction, the oil companies pay a licence fee and commit to a given level of activity on the block. These licencing rounds happen every few years and as long as I've been in the business, the announcement of each round has confirmed the wish of the UK Government to boost reserve replacement and production levels. Such an announcement now does not suddenly mean that there is about to be a sudden last-gasp attempt to siphon off Scotland's remaining resources.
Any petroleum basin will tend to reach peak production, plateau for a while, then decline unless some rejuvenation occurs through technology, new exploration concepts etc. Any basin will show a trend of early discoveries of giant fields (the Forties, Brent, Pipers of this world), followed by a tailing off of discovery size. The 1970s biggies had recoverable reserves of 2 -3 billion barrels...recent discoveries range between 5 and 20 million barrels. Oil production is also governed by "recovery rates" i.e. the amount of the gross volume of oil present that can be extracted...this can be as low as 10% or as high as about 70% depending on conditions. These recovery rates have improved over time but it is a law of diminishing returns as the oil becomes more expensive to extract.
As a result of these two factors, there is a tendency for explorers to give up on areas long before all prospects are exhausted, seeking less risky prospects elsewhere. The North Sea still contains a lot of oil, but spread across dozens and dozens of very small accumulations. Starting from this point, the North Sea would be uneconomical to develop. It is only the legacy infrastructure (existing pipelines, platforms, processing terminals etc) that make it possible for the business to continue.
To leave the stuff in the ground would be an egregious waste of a national resource whichever way you look at it. Therefore in order to keep the industry interested, the licensing authority i.e. the Government must provide regular stimuli in terms of licencing rounds, tax breaks and even some occasional arm-twisting etc . If this can be managed successfully, the North Sea will still be active in 20 years time but at levels much lower than today and the decline will be quite pronounced. That is simply inevitable.
Having done this job all around the world, it will doubtlessly inflame folk if I say the UK has been remarkably successful at maintaining oil company interest in declining prospects. The North Sea is already 20 or years past the date it was originally expected to deplete and yet still has a vibrant industry.
The idea that the UK government is suddenly trying to "boost" production in order to shore up its finances is attractive if your minded that way. In real life, any projects started now will take around 2 years to get into production and the fiscal income, whilst helpful in the future won't make much difference right now. Similarly, in all of this the conspiracy theorists are ignoring the fact that the oil companies have significant commercial freedom to develop at their own timetable. You will be very hard pressed to get a company to raise the capital required to develop a project that will be selling into an oversupplied market at a low price.
My real worry in all of this is that commentators and politicians have jumped on the US sub-prime debacle as the cause of all our woes. My take is that the spiraling of oil prices up to mid 2008 had already taken the shine off the boom and financial distress was creeping into the system. No surprise that this was felt first by the poor and marginalised sub-primers who started to default. When the recession starts to lift, the fundamentals of finite oil production capacity will reassert themselves very quickly and the price of oil will appreciate rapidly, snuffing out the recovery. We could see ourselves facing a decade of bumping our heads against the ceiling of economically available oil. That's why these days I work on alternatives...that and wanting to stop my kids moaning at me when the Bristol Channel arrives at the bottom of the garden in a few years time.
There...I've tried to make that as factual as possible without reaching for the dripping irony pen even once. Can we be friends again?
Complain about this comment
56 deanthetory
You misunderstood my point re RBS.
Had Scotland been independent, then the only liability that the Scottish state would have had was to guarantee the depositors money.
The losses of RBS were not just due to its own poor investment decisions, but the decision to buy ABN-Amro. That was a close run thing between RBS and Barclays as to achieved that! If Barclays had won the bidding war for it, then Barclays would be the ones suffering massive losses.
To give an idea of the complexity is shown by one big loss produced by the ABN portfolio was on a loan to chemical maker LyondellBasell, the U.S. arm of a Dutch concern, which filed for bankruptcy protection earlier this month. The company is controlled by Len Blavatnik, a Russian-American industrialist.
Scotland would have had to decide whether to pick up the tab for such a bad loan made by Dutch bankers helping a Dutch company expanding into the USA. I suspect any Scottish Government would just have let RBS go bust, and then buy the branch network and run it as a nationalised bank until selling it back to the private sector.
The decision by the UK Government to take on these recently added Dutch losses may have been rather unwise.
Complain about this comment
So, certain sectors of the Unionist community, who were quite happy to accept RBS and HBOS as UK banking institutions when they were flooding the UK treasury with the tax on their profits, now insist that they are Scottish because the UK treasury has had to bail them out.
Really, please, surely the debate has moved on from the childish, Btitish when good, Scottish/Welsh/N Irish when bad stage.
The simple fact is that RBS and HBOS are UK listed companies and, may still have been UK (or whatever it would be called in the event of Scottish Indipendence) listed companies if Scotland were independant.
I suspect, RBS might well have been a 'Scottish bank' if Scotland were independant but HBoS, despite a Flagship H/Q in Scotland (which is now the Scottish H/Q of Lloyds Banking Group) would probably have remained registered in England. In which case, we would only have had to bail out RBS (and again, that is only if it was incorporated in an independant Scotland and regulated by an independant Scotland's equivilent of the FSA.
The trouble is, all of this is hypothetical. We can't know what would have happened if Scotland was independant because there is no 'starting point' to measure from.
If Scotland had been independant 20 years ago, would RBS be as big as it is now? If it wasn't, would it have been in as much trouble?
Answer, who knows? And frankly, it doesn't matter.
You cannot take the current situation, make one change (ie an independant Scotland) and assume that nothing else would have changed. There is absolutely no logic in the argument.
What is important is the here and now and how we progress from this point forward. There is no point looking back and saying, if only this had been different... because it wasn't. We are where we are because of what actually happened. We have to learn from the mistakes that were actually made and not waste time discussing ones that, in a certain set of circumstances, may or may not have been made.
Learn from the past if you can (which we humans have found particularly hard to do), otherwise, leave it behind and try and find the best way forward.
Complain about this comment
Hi mightychewster,
Thank you for your explanation of how things probably worked.
Would I be right in suggesting that these gilts amount to IOUs which WE ALL are obliged to cough up for in the future rather than an immediate bailing out of the banks?
If so, it would be rather different to the claim by the government that they saved the banks.
Perhaps it could be likened to some sort of International mortgage arrangement? (Your property will be at risk if you do not make the payments).
Best wishes.
Complain about this comment
55 Global traveller
There is a Halifax just down the road from me where it very plainly states in the window that Halifax is a subsidiary of Bank of Scotland headquartered on the Mound, Edinburgh.
Halifax as an operating company does remain headquartered in Halifax and probably does have an English CEO...but hopefully more than one director as you imply. The parent company, which one must assume has some degree of strategic and operational control over its subsidiary is BoS in Edinburgh. Or perhaps the simple chookters were deceived by those Halifax Northern mill barons...it's a defence that is being used elsewhere at the moment
Complain about this comment
Just viewed Murphy on BBC 2 where he said the efficiency savings for Scotland would amount to 391 million for next year as opposed to John Swinney's 500 million. Murphy describes Swinney's calulations as being done on the back of a fag packet and that HM Treasury is always available to any of the devovled governments to make them aware of what efficiency savings they could make.
It all sounds like balderdash to me?
Complain about this comment
55 Thomas Porter
I think that you are confusing the Japanese and German governments with their people. The Japanese are fanatical savers, especially the old post-war generation. The government however has spent like a drunk and public debt is at around 110% of GDP.
Complain about this comment
#58 Reluctant-Expat
Had you checked on the debate within the US, you would have seen that the core of the debate was whether the preference was to save AIG as part of the US long term interests, or to salvage only those American institutions damaged by AIG.
States make decisions as to their long term interests. Those decisions are either right or wrong. However your endless parroting of selected aspects as indicating that Scotland would have been bankrupted by RBS, simply indicates that you don't understand the issues.
If I confused you when I said that the US "took a conscious decision to allow it's tax dollars to go to foreign banks as well ", then I'm sorry about that. I had expected your reading skills to be adequate enough to understand the meaning of "allow".
Complain about this comment
#41 Anglophone.
My memory is more correct than you think. We Work the Black Seam, from the Battlefield Band's 1987 Album "Celtic Hotel".
That's where I heard it first. I gave up on Sting and The Police in about 1981.
Of course, Sting may have wrote it before he decided that burning fossil fuels was bad for the rainforest. Can't find a link to an mp3 for you, but having just listened to Sting on YouTube, BB do a far better version.
(I honestly thought that it was one of Alan Reid's but there you go. He must have been giving Sting some lessons on the QT before he started his solo career)
#44, Dean,
Ah, Dean my boy, the Holy Crusading Zeal of Tory Youth at its finest, does the (tiny) remaining true blue part of my heart good to see it still alive. I once was as you, my signed photo of Maggie on the desk and my copy of "Capitalism and Freedom" held before me as a talisman to ward off all evil.
Nobody will disagree with you over the militancy of trade unions, or the winter of discontent and the dead lying unburied (some of us were there), or wondering every night whether there was to be a power cut because of the latest miner's strike.
And I've said this before to you, until the Tory party puts aside the past and realises the economic and social devastation that the Thatcher years brought to Scotland, you are lost.
So Dean, don't just brush it aside. Go and have a look at where Europe's largest steelworks once stood. Take that trip up the Clyde. Ask yourself why there are generations of people in Glasgow and Lanarkshire and Fife and Ayrshire who have never had jobs. Go and take a look round, for example, Port Glasgow, Greenock and Gourock. Not down the front, but up the back where all of the factories and light engineering works used to be.
Used to be.
The Jobs used to be there, Dean. Where did they go ? Just How many Call Centres and branches of McBurgers does it take to support a community ?
Is that the sort of society you want, Dean ?
Or is there no such thing as Society ?
Complain about this comment
65. oldnat
Thats cleared things up, cheers
Complain about this comment
Now Glenn Campbell says on BBC 2 that the Scotland Office said the cuts oops sorry efficiency savings would amount to 367 million. so already 2 different figures , one from Murphy live on BBC2 of 391 million and one via Glenn Campbell on BBC 2 of 367 million - even the Scotland office can't make up its mind. Murphy says that HM Treasury will offer best practice advice. Mmm... Darling has already torn up his figures from November and now predicts growth of 3.5% for 2010?????
Complain about this comment
Dear Wendy , Bravo !
You might also remind folk of other banks which had wee problems , like Northern Rock for example which I would describe as a UK bank.
I thought Barclays went to the Arabs for solace and a hand out butI could be wrong, and are'nt there a whole host of building societies queueing up with cap in hand.
There are none so blind as those who cannot see the deep doo doo this country ( UK) is in!
Lets all talk about Mr Murphys smar ar$ed arc of insolvency.
And in case anyone missed the angry letter from a REAL Irish economist , directed at the sec. in a state for Scotland , I retained a copy, you only have to ask!
Complain about this comment
65 OldNat
Nice try. Barclays did initiate the approach to ABN and had seemingly agreed a good price. It was at that point that RBS whisked out its claymore and charged recklessly in, upping the bidding. Barclays pulled out when they reasoned that the price was too high which sounds a whole lot more sensible than getting the asset at any cost in Fred's "Stalingrad" moment. Still a bad buy by anyones reckoning but it was RBS paying so much over the odds that has soured the deal so badly.
I also honestly doubt that the Scottish Government could have let RBS go bust. Assuming that it still had its NatWest subsidiary, that would have ruined half the UK population. That could be cause for heavily accented cackling but seriously, countries have gone to war over less.
Complain about this comment
#69, rickyross3359
Hmm. That should make for an entertaining time at this event then
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8011953.stm
May one suggest that The Murph is well supplied with folded-out fag packets as opposed to the usual scratch pad ?
Complain about this comment
66 FitLike
"So, certain sectors of the Unionist community, who were quite happy to accept RBS and HBOS as UK banking institutions when they were flooding the UK treasury with the tax on their profits, now insist that they are Scottish because the UK treasury has had to bail them out."
No...they were bailed out precisely because they are UK institutions. Something that I suspect that realistic people are quite glad of in these times. Had they been independent Scottish institutions with the same sort of profile you would be in situation rather like Iceland by now.
I predicted a well bitten hand at the time. Plus ca change
Complain about this comment
For something that started on the budget we seem to be re-hashing the same old ground..
Complain about this comment
57 & 60. The nationalist abandonment of their long-held belief of RBS and HBOS being Scottish corporate flagships, but instead are now British or English, continues.
65. Oldnat: "I suspect any Scottish Government would just have let RBS go bust, and then buy the branch network and run it as a nationalised bank until selling it back to the private sector."
Say what now? And you think I don't understand the banking system? Doesn't it strike you as curious that all governments are spending billions upon billions bailing out their respective banks as going concerns, instead of following your 'far cheaper' option?
Even Salmond, with nothing to offer this crisis, is staying utterly mute (bar stupid complaints about cuts in spending - grow up, Shrek!). How come even he isn't spinning such a radically alternative approach?
That's two in a row for you, oldnat. Any chance of a hat-trick?
Complain about this comment
~10
Do not forget the Jubilee Line extension each station on which coat more than the Scottish Parliament.
It would be useful if our English neighbours were to understand that it is london and the south east that is sucking all the money away from the rest of England and not Scottish "subsidy junkies"
Complain about this comment
- 392 + 25 = - 367 + (-129) = - 496 million
Looks awful like - 500 million to me, and thats not considering
+ (8.5% of 9 billion) = c -765
- 765 - 496 = around - 1.261 billion cuts for Scotland.
The least we can say at this stage is Brown's 2 billion increase is nonsense, and it would appear - at this stage - that the overall cuts are worse than what was predicted by many.
Meanwhile Obama hands Maryland (a comparable size population to Scotland) an extra $2.6 billion, Brown is desperate clawing back more to feed the blackhole he created and massively expanded in the public finances.
Complain about this comment
#12
The usual nonsense from this poster.
The UK is in a much bigger hole than Iceland or Ireland both of whom are wisely taking their pain now while the UK governemnt involves in more huge borrowing to buy time in the hope that it can somehow cling onto power.
Time will tell but neither of these small nations have disappeared because of economic difficulties and both will be out of recession before the UK is.
Complain about this comment
After watching the budget it is obvious that Labour is going to leave the Conservatives to sort out this mess. It is surely obvious to all that Labour is never going to win the next general election. It's a bit like when John Major stuffed Labour over the Dome, only this is far far bigger.
Complain about this comment
Just a thought on Darlings stupidity.
How many people that were going to buy a new car will be rushing to buy an old banger for about 200 quid and then making a tidy profit with the money off the new car.
Also so much for the "green" budget as it would appear that you can buy any type of gas guzzler and still get the 2000 quid.
Darling the Arthur Dailey of international finance. The Japanese, German and French car makers will be erecting statues to him.
Complain about this comment
#72, excellent post Chiefy - Dean, you could do with a look at some of the tougher areas of Stevenson or Cumnock if you want to see something of the Union Dividend in Ayrshire.
On top of that there is a lot of hidden poverty, North Ayrshire for example is surprisingly badly hit, and at first glance for much of it you probably wouldn't think so,
This is from 2006 (imagine what Broon's economic meltdown is now doing for the area),
http://www.harbourarts.org.uk/na/DevelopProm.nsf/index/A79EFBF7A7C1D7E980256F9D005D1DA1?OpenDocument&MenuType=Business-Local%20Area%20Statistics&DocDisplay=NoDoc&DFBC=Social&CatLevel=2%7C%7C
5% most deprived in Scotland: NA = 5.1%
10% most deprived in Scotland: NA = 12.2%
15% most deprived in Scotland: NA = 18.0%
20% most deprived in Scotland: NA = 26.7%
Were you to separate North Coast/Garnock Valley, from Three Towns-Kilwinning-Irvine, figures would be even more striking. Guess where the majority Labour voting areas are, guess what Labour has done for those areas: FA! That is before and after Labour's sell-out and adoption of Thatcherite voodoo economics, now they are little more than Tories wearing red.
Complain about this comment
75. That "REAL Irish economist" was little more than a small-time economic commentator from an Irish radio station.
However, I remember his tirade with great fondness, also that he conveniently neglected to mention the many billions that have been poured into Ireland by the EU over past decades, along with his predictions that "Ireland will come out this recession stronger than the UK".
Feel free to copy and paste.
Complain about this comment
Anglophone:
#78.
"No...they were bailed out precisely because they are UK institutions. Something that I suspect that realistic people are quite glad of in these times. Had they been independent Scottish institutions with the same sort of profile you would be in situation rather like Iceland by now."
I was with you untill you wrote the last part, "...you would be in situation rather like Iceland by now."
This is called scaremongering, it's when individuals cling onto some baseless claims that would indicate the worst case possibility.
There's no evidence to suggest we would be another Iceland.
Even I acknolodge that it's possible, I have also said we could have been another Norway.
There's no reason why Scotland should have only one fate, and that's to become another Iceland.
But thank you, they were British Banks, bailed out by the British taxpayers (or Chinese taxpayers, who did we borrow from?) and if we were independent the chances would be that England, and England alone would hold majority stakes in RBS and HBOS.
Complain about this comment
Reluctant-Expat:
#80.
"57 & 60. The nationalist abandonment of their long-held belief of RBS and HBOS being Scottish corporate flagships, but instead are now British or English, continues."
It has never been some of type of policy to see RBS and HBOS as Scottish instituations.
Infact even the SNP have never claimed some nonesense. Alex Salmond and the Scottish National Party have only followed one line, keep main responsibilities for these banks in Scotland and to ensure as many jobs in Scotland as possible.
I believe the culprits for wishing to cling onto RBS and HBOS as being Scottish falls upon Gordon Brown, Labour, the Conservatives and the anti-Scottish factors from individuals from down south, oh and those up north who seek to keep the Union at all costs.
You've lost all credibility, you recently attempted to paint RBS and HBOS as Scottish-only as one reason why Scotland can't be independent... pathetic.
65. Oldnat: "I suspect any Scottish Government would just have let RBS go bust, and then buy the branch network and run it as a nationalised bank until selling it back to the private sector."
Say what now? And you think I don't understand the banking system? Doesn't it strike you as curious that all governments are spending billions upon billions bailing out their respective banks as going concerns, instead of following your 'far cheaper' option?
"Even Salmond, with nothing to offer this crisis, is staying utterly mute (bar stupid complaints about cuts in spending - grow up, Shrek!). How come even he isn't spinning such a radically alternative approach?"
You have lost all credibility, grow up Shrek? Yes, very mature.
Alex Salmond has insisted why spend billions on bailing out banks and encouraging banks to take over banks when you could keep them as independent instituations?
It's reasonable to ask, why spend billions taking the worst of what they have to offer and let them takeover the best parts!
I thought you would have disappeared for a few weeks.
A two billion pounds increase to the Scottish grant... Ha, what a liar you are.
And you expect us to actually listen to your nonesense?
Complain about this comment
#76 Anglophone
And aren't Barclays glad!
My point was actually, that it's silly simply to assume that the UK action with regard to RBS (within a UK context) would have been replicated in the theoretical context of an Independent Scotland.
What do you imagine would happen to the Yorkshire and Clydesdale Banks if the National Australian Bank went bust?
Complain about this comment
#78 Anglophone.
I agree with you entirely, they were bailed out because they were UK banks, but there are a number of posters on this site who seem to forget this fact and insist on pointing out that they were Scottish institutions in an attempt to demonstrate that Scotland couldn't have coped without UK help.
It's this lack of reason and spurious half truths dressed up as unasailable facts that tends to irritate me.
Complain about this comment
Reluctant-Expat:
#87.
The purpose of the European Union when it comes to dishing out resources is for that country to one day become a donar later on (Poland for example).
Let's follow your arguements, Scotland has apprently been in the red for years, possibly decades. Despite being apart of the United Kingdom, we have never been ina position to give back to the British Treasury.
Has the United Kingdom, not then failed Scotland in that aspect?
Complain about this comment
#80 Reluctant-Expat
The unique situation about RBS was the recent acquisition of RBN-Ambro.
There are circumstances in which it makes more sense to let a failed business go down.
I'm afraid your assumption that there is only one single strategy fails to take that into account.
Complain about this comment
# 85 dubbieside
Seemingly one has to show that they have owned this 10 year old car for at least one year and the car must be taxed and have a valid MOT certificate. What is idiotic about this political 2000 GBp is that the reason they have a 10 year old car in the first place is because they can't afford a newer one. Hence, the government know that this is just a political stance that will probably add to the headlines. I am just listening to BBC news24 now and this is being mentioned. It's a bit like the 50% tax for the rich. It's good headlines but is never going to make even a dent in the borrowing that the government is planning to make. It's all a show to avoid talking about the economic mess that the UK government is in. David Cameron was right in calling this government the 'living dead'.
Complain about this comment
The uninteligent recurring hypothetical question, that seems to give so many pathetic folk a degree of self satisfaction. "Could an independant Scotland have bailed out RBS & HBOS? himph..."
Well, of course it couldn't have, no more than it could have bailed out American Banks! If I am allowed to be hypothetical in reply to that. Could I also ask the hypothetical question "could an independant England have bailed out RBS & HBOS?
Another one, could a country be expected to bail out a bank which drives in an economy more than 10 times its size (population wise).? Hypothetically speaking of course ;-)
*76 anglophony.
Are you aticipating Scotland and England should go to war man?!
Thought it was pens and Xs we fought with now. A good insight into you psychology.
P.S. You think you're clever with the irony pen, hahahheh! Its just the vile bile of your discontentment. B4 you lash out, I know I'm not content either, but I wouldn't go to war about it.
Complain about this comment
#71. oldnat
He's using an old Westminster dictionary which has words like integrity and honesty blacked out under the national security clause.
His figures like Darling's are taken from their latest bingo cards as their both at sixes and sevens.
New Labour know full well that they are doomed at the next election and are hoping to make gains after Cameron's government but zombies are the only creatures that can come back to life.
Complain about this comment
93. I never said there was only one single strategy. There are clearly several in operation around the world.
What I pointed out was that not one involved your proposal "to let them fail and then buy up the branch network".
Not one.
In any way.
Not even in Ireland and Iceland.
Complain about this comment
72. Chiefy1724
"The economic and social devistation that the Thatcher years brought to Scotland"
You seem to imply that Baroness Thatcher somehow disliked the Scots. Let me dispel this myth.
Can I refer you to an excellently written piece in the Sunday Herald online:
http://www.sundayherald.com/mostpopular.var.2501414.mostviewed.thatcher_and_scotland.php
It sums up my attitude rather well in fact concerning the how the lady viewed Scots.
The Herald journalist concludes its all about the Scottish victimhood complex: I quote from the Herald:
"So no matter how many times Ravens-craig was bailed out (despite Thatcher's "no subsidies" rhetoric), or how often the Scottish Office escaped savage spending cuts afflicting other departments, the reaction was usually the same. The poll tax was but the culmination of an innate suspicion that every government measure was contrived to inflict pain on long-suffering Scots guinea pigs."
----
But to address your point about Thatcher's economic policies and their consquences upon Scotland, not all Scots would agree that Scotland objected to her economic policies, indeed Alex Salmond doesnt:
http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Alex-Salmond-Scotland-39didn39t-mind39.4411586.jp
He explains that what Scots didnt like was the implications of her social policies (but not directly the policies themselves). Thats not just me saying that its the SNP leader and first minister of Scotland.
So while I accept you may dissagree, but I feel I'm in rather good company defending Conservative policy.
Complain about this comment
89. Y'see. Now this is why this site is only good for entertainment nowadays.
'Tis a shame.
Sigh.
Complain about this comment
Comment 81:
How could I forget, I lived not far from one of the stations when I lived in Rotherhithe.
I had moved there from my previous rented flat on one Aspen Lane, beside Narrow Street, right beside the entrance to the Limehouse Link a tunnel of just over 1 mile allowed access to Canary Wharf and the Isle of Dogs.
The cost of the link was just under 300 million, this was finished in the early 90's.
I visited the area a year ago and the amount spent on these stations, the Surrey Quays and Greenwich area alone is staggering.
If you want to see the infrastructure projects that the North Sea revenues have paid for just visit London.
The people I feel sorry for are those in the North of England, they have a Hobson's choice at the next election. I remember again such a situation in East London when the people felt that the mainstream party's and the media were ignoring them, they opted then for the BNP.
We at least have the left of centre and inclusive SNP - thank god !!
Complain about this comment
100. greenockboy
"We at least have the left of centre and inclusive SNP - thank god !!"
I Salmondites in the SNP are certainly not left of centre in my opinion- see my 98 for reasons why.
Complain about this comment
Children, children! That must rank as the worst 100 posts on Blether with Brian in a long while. I fear you're all being dragged down to ______'s level (insert the name of your favourite personal nemesis).
There's enough meaningful stuff to debate today instead of rehashing all these pointless old arguments. You'll never convince each other, just let it go! You might just feel better for it ;o)
Top of the class:
#64 Anglophone - excellent summary! Your serious side is much more interesting than winding up the easily-wound-up. That goes for you too R-E, although I think you know that given your lament in #99 ;o)
#66 Fit Like? - spot on. For as every wee bairn knows, if Scotland had been independent Nessie would have come out of hiding and spread jobbies of purest gold throughout the land, giving us a true kakistocracy! And that's as logically rigorous as any of the hypothetical scenarios regurgitated this afternoon (and on many, many other afternoons I recall).
Complain about this comment
Well, well - I can reveal that the PCC will indeed be taking up the complaint against The Scotsman re: 'Salmond Stumped Over maths Question'
I can also reveal that I have been assured that the editor of The Scotsman, who is currently a member of the Press Complaints Commission, won't take part in any deliberations or discussions.
Do I expect them to ask The Scotsman to apologise? No, however I look forward to seeing their reasons for not doing so.
Complain about this comment
100. greenockboy: "If you want to see the infrastructure projects that the North Sea revenues have paid for just visit London."
Yet again (and this is quite astonishing), you need to informed that Scotland receives its full geographic share of oil revenues.
Even the SNP now accept this.
Yet you, greenockboy, continue to peddle this totally discredited nonsense.
Now, you either can't grasp this very simple fact despite constant prompts, which makes you another of the 'sharp as a button nationalists'...
...or you know this is plain nonsense but continue to repeat it regardless, which make you another of the 'habitually lying nationalists'.
Care to help us out on which one you are? Maybe you're 'both'? Although certainly not 'neither'.
Either way, as Master Porter likes to say, "you have no credibility!!".
Complain about this comment
Perhaps Reluctant Expat and the other Unionists might like to follow their own logic and explain why the non-Scottish taxpayers of the UK should have bailed out 'Scottish' banks? If they are so indigenously Scottish why should they have to fork out for Scottish failures? Is it charity? Is it because Scotland is incapable? How, therefore is it fair or equitable for other UK taxpayers to subsidize Scottish failure?
(Before any Nationalists berate me for perpetrating myths commonly found in such refined English publications like the Daily Mail, I realize that the above is not the situation in the real world. However, Unionists have to be made to account for their own unique brand of logic and follow it through to it's conclusion.)
On this issue of HBOS having it's operational HQ in England with directors sources from there also this isn't in doubt. Indeed to follow through the logic of Anglophone, Lloyds would be a Scottish Bank as it's brass plate and registered office arevon George Street in Edinburgh.
Complain about this comment
Back to the Budget
Did anyone notice that the new 50% rate of Income Tax seems to over estimate the revenue that it will bring in?
My understanding is that many of those earning more than 150,000 GBP can save that additional 10% tax, by simply ensuring that their income over that level is paid in tax-free pension contributions.
Complain about this comment
deanthetory wrote:
"see my 98 for reasons why."
Are you joking, why would I read a contribution from the person who blamed Alex Salmond for the two trips fiasco to China even after it was clearly stated that Salmond's visit had been organised and reported in the press months before Jim Murphy's?
Dean, sorry to break the news to you, but I don't take your posts seriously.
Complain about this comment
gedguy2
Thanks for that information. As with all Labour budgets the devil is in the detail.
Re the shrek jibe. I realize now where I have seen it before, the late lamented AM2 used to use it when he polluted the Scotsman pages.
As I said before that is pathetic, and you know his "arguments" are non existent when all he has to offer are pathetic jibes.
We may end up like the Scotsman pages when RE was answering AM2. Will he start talking to himself here as well?
Complain about this comment
Douglas Fraser on BBC national news now:
Interestingly the question asked of the members of the public was about the tax hike on high earners - no mention of the cuts to the Scottish budget.
Will we see this cut featuring prominently in the Scottish media - let's wait and see.
Complain about this comment
Worth having a look at Craig Murray on the Budget.
While one of his recent posts suggests that he's not exactly the nicest person in the world, it's a good summing up of "the total politicisation of the Civil Service under New Labour."
Complain about this comment
deanthetory
So we have your opinion of a puff piece on Thatcher written in the Herald.
Then we have your interpretation of a totally misleading quote from the Scotsman.
What Alex Salmond said was "Scots didn't like the social impacts of Thatcher" particularly as we boar the brunt of her failed vindictive policies.
The typical tory who knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
Tens of thousands of Scots who had to endure Thatchers years by living through them, rather than you for whom it is seen as an academic history lesson, will tell you that Thatcher made the torys toxic in Scotland.
Five leaders later and the torys are still toxic in Scotland, as will be revealed by the number of MPs they have in Scotland after the next general election. Still you may be able to spin it as 100% increase. Note the may.
Complain about this comment
#98 Dean.
"You seem to imply that Baroness Thatcher somehow disliked the Scots"
I don't know where you got that from in anything that I said. I could be smart and say "Typical Tory, never listens" but instead I'll invite you to prove your contention from Anything that I have written.
Secondly, Dean, you're still dodging the issue.
Regardless of what Eck said, (and my reading of it is probably somewhat different to yours), the economic policies of the Tory government of 1979-1997 laid waste to Scotland economically and socially. The "heavy industries" disappeared in a matter of years and our economy was reliant on them. Some may argue that it was because of "our place" in the Union that those industries "developed" in Scotland.
Lets come back to your original post at #22
"I for one don't believe the Scots economy is balanced enough, given its over-reliance upon expensive and unproductive public sector, and other than oil, whisky and woolie jumpers I fail to see what we have to export. Modern Tech, perhaps before the recession polished many of these smaller enterprises off."
You still haven't answered Why The Scots Economy isn't "balanced" ?
My contention is that we are reaping the legacy of not only the Tory government from 1979 but also the NuLab kakistocracy since. There is no balance because the base is gone and the economy forced to being one of "service sector" and intanglibles.
The Thatcherite "economic revolution" laid waste to this land, because it concentrated on pounds and pence and not people.
The Tory Party forgot one of Adam Smith's (and Churchill's) finest creeds, that the greatest wealth of a nation is its people. From the highest to the lowest, the rich to the poor.
But take away those things around which a community is built and you destroy the people. You destroy their sense of worth, of accomplishment, of achievement. You end up with a lack of ambition, a lack of belief and self-confidence and a culture of dependence.
Dean, I argued Tory Economic Theories on the doorstep and in the debates against the Young Liberals and the Young Socialists and the Young Nats literally before you were born. At the start of and the height of the Thatcher years. Hey, and let me tell you, being a Scottish Tory was far less fun then than it is now.
We'll agree to disagree, because I know that no argument will make you listen, because I didn't. Only experience will change your view.
Meanwhile, should you happen to be in any of the places that myself and pattymkirkwood have mentioned, stop and take a look.
Ask yourself how they got that way. Have a think about what was there once. Then put aside the pounds and pence, and the "militant unions brought this about" and "it was necessary to save the nation".
Think about the people.
Post it up somewhere in 5 years. And then tell me how much sense Tory Economic Theories make.
Complain about this comment
I don't need your permission,
"Irish economist Marc Coleman on the supposed demise of the arc of prosperity and Jim Murphy's ill-advised comments:
I don't know which is more shocking about Jim Murphy's recent comments on Ireland's economy. As Secretary of State for Scotland, presumably carrying a degree of responsibility for managing Scotland's economy, the incompetence is staggering. More shocking still is the use of megaphone diplomacy – for the most selfish of political reasons – at such a sensitive time, when loose talk by politicians can do damage."
It s nice to know that we are blessed by your presence and fantastic intellect so OFTEN!
Are you an economist or just some pompous ass who enjoys putting everyone else down?
You certainly have an extremely high opinion of your own opinions.
Reminds me of another.
Complain about this comment
# 108 Dubbieside
There are certain posters on here that I don't even bother reading, not because I disagree with them (they have a right to be wrong the same as I) but because they are rude to other posters. If I was in a pub and in the company of people like that then I would ignore them until they behaved and learned some common manners. You can decide yourself who those people are.
Complain about this comment
"The Tory Party forgot one of Adam Smith's (and Churchill's) finest creeds, that the greatest wealth of a nation is its people."
It was in Thatcher's Perth conference speech (1988) when she said; and reminded ; the party of exactly your point. She said "They saw that it's not government which creates wealth- it's the people.
-copy of the speech- [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
"You still haven't answered Why The Scots Economy isn't "balanced" ?"
The main point for me saying that the size and magnitude of the public sector; the unprofitable side of the economy. It's size compared to the private sector is unbalanced; we need a bigger private sector in terms of employing of workers, and less reliance on employment by the state.
But also, Scotland does rely heavily on relatively few sectors, tourism, whisky, oil industries. The new tech jobs as I say I believe have been hit for six given the Brown recession. I'd like to see less Scottish economic reliance upon the (although profitable) "invisible economy" -i.e. finance and service- and a bit more on a 'real' economy. And yep, I conceed freely that Thatcherism, as a policy, is responsible in no small part for the undermining of that real economy. In that you are correct to a degree.
Although I shall say that those 18 years did free the Scots people in a number of aspects, which surely went towards setting them 'free' as it where: it ended labours controls/restrictions on;
investment, enterprise, wages, and stopped penalising effort by making effort and ability into asset over socialisms tendency to make it a liability.
But can I also make reference to your cheeky "no such thing as society" grenade :)
I think Maggsie ment that there is no such thing as the internationalist socialist vision of a utopian society, but only communities and individuals. That doesnt seem inflamatory to me.
Complain about this comment
Scotland & Her Oil
248 Billion pound’s in tax revenue 1968 – 2007
2009 forecast 12-5 Billion pound’s tax revenue
2007 Balance of trade deficit reduced by 29 Billion pound’s
38 Billion barrels produced since 1968
105% of the U.K. oil requirements in 2007 at 583 million barrels
75% of the U.K. gas requirements in 2007 at 70 Billion cubic metres
8th highest gas producers worldwide.
18th highest oil producers worldwide.
13th highest gas & oil producers worldwide.
381 gas & oil fields as of 2007 and set to increase.
103 oil platforms of which 17 are floating.
181 gas platforms.
14,000 Kilometres of oil & gas pipes.
10 new oil fields in 2007.
11 new gas fields in 2007.
It's Time.
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
Labour simply have to go, too use a much loved phrase of some in here......they have no credibility.
Complain about this comment
Oh and greenockboy, thought I should mention, today you've not exactly shown in your debate with Expat and Anglophile. They've exposed your rubbish peddlings about the "oil, the oil". That black gold you love to bleat on about.
The difference is, when I became aware of my error in regards to blaming Alex Salmond for those trips I apologised immediately (as oldnat may recall, he was rather decent about it all). I acknowledge when I am wrong, you can't/unable to.
So I'm really not all that surprised that your mind is too closed to read a Sunday Herald and Scotsman article (as I was attempting to direct you to, to try and open you up to some points of view not neccessarily reflective of your own typically cybernattish)
Complain about this comment
Hmm, amazing how quick the Thatcher economic crew raised it's head?.
Do we really want another three decades of high unemployment and social divisions?.
I hear Maverick play's a mean game of poker anybody else care to put their chips on the table. pe
Complain about this comment
The Scotland vs UK financial arguments are lame as there is a simple and only way to show the true position :
Fiscal control and accountability for Scotland.
Apparently, only core unionists are against this idea. How strange? As arch unionist Calman admitted: it would risk the union. How could this be?
However one thing is pretty certain: that New Labour are finished at the GE and the Tories are ascendant. Good news or at least better for the UK certainly. What will this mean for Scotland though? What do the tories offer Scotland?
The tories will talk the UK talk but will surely ring fence the South of the UK for continued investment and recovery to boost the ‘UK’ economy as before. Remember, ‘unemployment in the North is the price for prosperity in the south.’ The south gets investment to help the South. The North also gets investment…sometimes, yet only as long as it also helps the South…simple.
We have seen this all before. History may again repeat in full…there is such a 70s feel at the moment (minus the industry and Oil).
Alternatively we can wake up and decide to take control of our own affairs for many, many reasons. Scotland and indeed the North of England has very different notions of what we consider as key issues This includes defense policy, energy, foreign policy, social issues etc etc. Its definitely not a Scottish /English thing its more a North/ South thing….except Scotland has a constitutional Joker to play.
Scotland for a long time has wanted to go in one particular direction on key issues but has been taken in a different direction due to sheer weight of numbers and representation in the south. This representation imbalance needs redressed and can only be done one way. The sheer over population in the South and its lack of resources is also its Achilles heal though.
Stronger together is a truism, but we don’t have to be joined at the hip and we are only together IF thats where we both want to go. Two states can be stronger than one where we are united and have consensus while having the freedom do also focus on where we differ.
Scotland must either get busy being nothing more than a region or become a country and state once more. Not many takers for the region status compared to the latter. As for tweaking the devolved entity? The All tweaked, unaccountable, all Barnetted, fag packet, GERS obfuscated, borrow constrained, Scotland Acted, Scottish officed, semi devolved entity, part reserved, part state, , part executive, half country, half region... certainly isn’t working too well. Seriously, how could it?
Complain about this comment
112. Chiefy1724
I tried to reply to your points in detail in 115, but apparently auntie Beeb doesnt like me using links or something. (irritating sigh).
So hopefully this time it will work, here goes:
"You still haven't answered Why The Scots Economy isn't "balanced" ?"
I see it as not being balanced in a couple of ways. For example, the over reliance upon the public over the privatesector, in terms of employment alone is detrimental to Scotlands economic potential. The public sector size that sucessive Labour governments have built up here make our economy less balanced than it should be, because I really believe that the safest job is in a competitive, and profitable private sector; where ability and merit alone get you on.
In other aspects, I also consider that Scotland has been too overreliant upon the 'invisible economy' i.e. financial sectors around Edinburgh for example, and the service economy. Yes, you are right that the 18 years of unrelenting thatcherite economics does carry much of the can for the demise of the 'real economy' ;i.e. manufacturing and the like.
Scotland needs to produce more exportable manufactured goods, other than whisky and a good tourist location image to the Big Apple.
Until we see realignments along these lines then I do hold to the view that in these areas Scotlands economy remains unbalanced in key areas.
"the Tory Party forgot one of Adam Smith's (and Churchill's) finest creeds, that the greatest wealth of a nation is its people."
Not forgotten, indeed Margaret Thatcher did emphasis exactly what your saying in her speech to the Con party Perth Conference 1988 (I'll try the link to it seperately so that this reply will get past auntie beeb):
"They saw [Adam Smith Hume, Fergusson] that it's not government which creates the wealth- it's the people"
And I will next time I'm along the clyde side have a look around. And I do get annoyed about the failure of Thatcher to preserve a Scottish real economy base- and the collapse of the heavy industries in these areas are a testimony to that. In many cases we equally need to remember that heavy industry was fast moving out of time in the UK, as it evolved economically away from such heavy industry focus; I wont cry for all cases of manufacturing closures- factories arent there to employ people for employments sake.
Complain about this comment
@ 121 that link for you Chiefy1724:
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
(hope it passes auntie beeb this time, its a harmless speech; a source-reference for my case).
Complain about this comment
I have never been a great lover of Margaret Thatcher but what she did for the UK economy, at that time, was exactly what was needed. You have to remember that in the 70s the country was not ruled by the politicians but by left wing unions bent on the destruction of the UK. They needed to be brought into line. Also the heavy industry was subsidised up to the hilt and those subsidies were destroying the economy of the UK. Something had to be done. Then along came Margaret Thatcher who forced the UK out of left wing politics into a system where we were, once again, able to hold our head high on the world stage.
Complain about this comment
Why have none of the Labour quislings who Bleated about the SNP plans for minimum alcohol pricing been on to complain about the increase in Duty.
An increase in the price of all drink, not just supermarket discounts. And an attack on Scotland's biggest export earner.
Shame al-Jabeeba can't be bothered reportinng on this.
Also UKplc is now flat stoney broke bankrupt. PLease explain the benefit Scotland gets from being part of such a failed state?
Complain about this comment
Half a billion in budget cuts is no great problem, if we got rid of the numpties at the bottom of the high street and sold that monstrosity of a building we'd propbably be well into profit. (thats assuming anybody would be dumb enough to buy the building ) What point was there to devolution in the first place if we end up dependent on a numptie like Alistair Darling's largesse? Better to either be independent or a full part of the union instead of having to go cap in hand to a government intent on not only ruining Britain but dragging Scotland down with it. It makes you yearn for the days when one man and a few civil servants in St Andrew's House ran the country very efficiently, though the calibre of these Scottish secretaries was a bit higher than the one we are saddled with now, I doubt if he could run a bingo stall without fiddling the numbers.
Complain about this comment
#123
Dear oh dear..... One of the genuinely destructive things that Thatcher did was to kill off BRITOIL which was set up as the UK's national oil company by Tony Benn in the 70s. She did it purely on grounds of political dogma but also under pressure from companies such as BP and of course the big US oil companies who wanted free rein to suck as much oil/gas as they could out of the N Sea as they could.
In Norway they did the opposite setting up STATOIL which up to 2007 or so had an automatic stake in all Norwegian fields but it also - and this was crucially important - acted as a champion for Norwegian engineering and high tech oil/gas companies supporting their R&D and also providing them with the opportunity to trial their new tech.
The consequence was that between them the USA and Norway now pretty much dominate the strategically important bits of the industry.
It was an awful decision and Thatcher should never be forgiven for making such a tactical and strategic error which left us so incredibly weak in an industry which we should have dominated.
Complain about this comment
The Barnett Formula & Scotland
The Barnett Formula originally aimed at areas with average lower incomes, needs in health care and social housing. Previously areas of the U.K. were and in many cases still are, neglected by London.
Scotland was a basket case through neglect and under investment, so the formula was introduced to level the playing fields of a so called union.
On the bases that previous neglect and under investment is the reasoning behind the formula, can anyone tell me why Londoners qualify for 114 % of the Barnett Formula ?
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
Sorry if anyone feels offended but this budget is done in a spiteful way by a corrupt party for purely political reasons. Who in their right minds in government could vote for a borrowing budget which will exceed the total of the borrowing of the last 3 - 400years. Its a Joke only I wish it was.
Clueless In Cuckooland
Complain about this comment
@37
Anglophone, you appear to have addressed this post to yourself.
Complain about this comment
Re #17 reluctant-to-tell-the-truth
Well, I thought I would have a little wander down memory lane and look at BTs blog, and low and behold, it really is a trip down memory lane with the same old unionist spin-merchants spewing forth.
I tell you what, Scotland will foot the bill for all of the 500bn to bail out RBS and HBOS if we can also have all the revenue and jobs generated by these institutions from their insception. I'm sure all the whizzes at the treasury can figure out the amount they owe us for all the money generated by our banks.
No, not so keen on that? didn't think so, that's the problem with the union dividend, it's all about sharing (keeping) the gains, but pointing the finger at us for the losses.
BTW, while we are on union dividends, explain the benefit to me of our portion of the 175bn to be borrowed in a single year. Not so much a union dividend, more a union debt.
Complain about this comment
The idea that smaller countries are more vunerable to the recession is a Labour smoke screen to deflect the awful mess they have governed over. It's a Unionist lie.
U. K. Norway
Trade Balance: - 182 + 82-5
Current Acc - 45.6 + 86-5
% GDP 2008 - 3-0 +18-4
Budget Blance - 5-3 + 19-7
% oF GDP
Incidentally, Norway has a smaller population than Scotland. Makes you think ?
Complain about this comment
129 Grassy Knollington
Yep quite deliberately. Early in the blog I referred to an IMF report, only to have that report, made only three months ago turned on its head by a new release today.
The point I was trying make was that all these reports and projections are just frantic guesses and nobody knows what's going on at the moment.
Possibly time to finally put a paper bag over the head, remain calm and await further instructions.
Complain about this comment
127 Wanashoo
"On the bases that previous neglect and under investment is the reasoning behind the formula, can anyone tell me why Londoners qualify for 114 % of the Barnett Formula ?"
Contrary to the popular belief on these pages, London is not a wall to wall mass of champagne swilling bankers struggling by on half milion pound bonuses. It contains some of the poorest parts of the whole country. Visit some of the areas in Tower Hamlets and Eastwards and you'll understand what I mean.
Alternatively don't. In nationalist circles I've noticed that the facts should never be allowed to spoil a good grievance.
Complain about this comment
#132 Anglophone
As I'm watching Channel 4's Despatches on the crash at the moment, I find myself in complete agreement.
Since so much of the economic data of recent years, is based on a bubble of non-existent money, we'll have to wait some time to have any accurate picture.
Complain about this comment
#133 Anglophone
I think you're back to stretching what people say, in order to paint them as having a ridiculous position. I recognise the technique - used it myself on occasions - but you are overusing it.
The point is not the relative wealth within an economic region - that's a matter for the social policy makers - that's being commented on.
It's the comparative differentials between these regions and whether there is an unfair advantage to one compared with another.
I've used the term region as an economic, rather than a political expression. The tragedy for the English regions is the London centralism of your nation.
Complain about this comment
#98
Having been deeply involved in the Ravenscraig campaign probably before deanthetory was born I resent the utter rubbish now being spouted about Ravenscraig. It was bad enough listening to lies about it as we tried to save it 20 years ago but to hear the same lies being accepted as truths today is insufferable.
Ravenscarig and Gartcosh in particular and the rest of the Scottish steel industry was killed off because it had been decided to transfer UK steelmaking into Mrs Thatcher's "golden triangle" of UK indusrty from Teeside across to S Wales and supplying into Europe through the Channel
Tunnel. This could only have happened because the independent Scottish Steel industry, probably the finest and most integrated multi functioned industry of its type in the world, was nationalised and control of it was taken out of Scotland. When Ravenscraig was closed it was achieving the highest production levels ever achieved in steelmaking in Europe yet sly implications of a workshy workforce were easily swallowed by Scots Tories and their supporters who have always been too happy to look down their noses at the hard working men of industrial Scotland. I lived and worked in Lanarkshire in those days and knew men who routinely did 60 and 70 hour weeks in the steel works. Every impediment was put in the way of Ravenscraig. Pit head surcharges were put on the coal for its furnaces, extra charges were put on its transport costs and eventually the management of BS, who were in the process of trying to cripple Ravenscraig by not repairing furnaces, were reduced to ordering it to produce only slag iron (which you make to use up surplus furnace capacity) which could not be sold profitably.
Gartcosh had a full order book for over two years ahead when it wqs killed off. It produced British motor industry preferred stretched steel and there was a queue from continental motor manufactures for its product. We were fed the lie that its plant was clapped out and then watched as it was dismantled immediately Gartcosh was closed and shipped to Alpha Steel in South Wales where it was installed and put immediately to work. I was at the gates of Gartcosh when it was shipped out. The Scottish Steel industry was an indiginous industry born out of the natural resources of Scotland and were not a UK Government gift.
Fortunately many Scots realised what was being done to Scotland's industrial base by Margaret Thatcher. Basically the jobs and the work were being transferred south. Neither Teeside or Alpha Steel ever reached the productionn levels of Ravenscraig and Gartcosh.
Perhaps the most significant figure that came to prominence in this battle was Iain Lawson. Tory candidate and chairman of Mrs Thatcher's Scottish Tory Candidates Conference Iain saw exactly what was being done and moved to the SNP.
(Mrs Lawson is presently the SNP Provost of Paisley).
I suggest deanthetory should speak to the people that know what happened rather than swallow the words of some ill informed journalist (there are lots of careless ones who swallowed the guff and are selling Scotland short).
It is absolutely no accident that a whole generation of Scots detest Mrs Thatcher and stopped voting Tory and making excuses for her is quite the worst thing any Tory in Scotland can do.
Complain about this comment
#116 Wansanshoo
Excellent post and well researched.
Pity, as far as a number of posters on this blog are concerned, it won't 'so much' fall on deaf ears as closed minds.
#98 Dean
Did you really think we would forget the two little words "so much" which were(deliberately) missed out by the Sunday Herald when selectively misquoting Alex Salmond on Thatcher's Economic and Social policies?
Complain about this comment
I've just read comment number 132:
As Anglophone admits talking to himself, a trait common to Unionist posters elsewhere. They usually however create another username first.
"Keep watching, the number you want will turn up soon"
So, who is the 'you' in this sentence?
Complain about this comment
Re my #137 - Apologies to the Sunday Herald, I did of course mean 'selectively misquoted by the Scotsman' (as usual)
Angus
Complain about this comment
Anglophone 133#
I spend twenty one days per month in London, the balance at home in Scotland. I commute home by various means and routes. This, I believe, qualifies me to voice my opinion with more authority than most.
On this basis let me ask again, should Londoners qualify for 114% of the Barnett Formula?
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
#133
The facts are that London gets 114% of the Barnett formula and has the highest per capita government spend of any region of the UK and is sucking resources out of the rest of England.
Complain about this comment
Re 134
It also seems to me that the extent of these problems are still not fully understood.
When you watch and read every thing written over this for the last few weeks it seems difficult to believe that this was not forseeable by any politician of any party.
Reform of the banking system seems to have disappeared.
we need to understand this more fully. Also it now seems inevitable that huge cuts are required in public spending. No indication of where. Surely ID card must now be binned? Trident must look a bit dodgy now? These are significant projects that could be cancelled without much effect.
The next election must be fought on who will cut what by how much?
Surely the next holyrood election must be fought on pretty much the same basis?
Complain about this comment
#64 Anglophone
Only if you promise to persuade for independence!
Yes, friends.
(...or are you just after my oil? ;-)
I don't like when someone stereotypes in the face of a reasonable argument, or more to the point, when they've lost the argument. (Yes, I know to not can be bo-ring!) And you clearly don't even remotely need to. (Is it attention seeking? ;-) It's a bit below the belt (stereotypes you). You have probably been told you are very cutting (as have I - not sure I am...), you seem straight up though...so "You must use your "powers" for good!"
;-)
On your info. regarding oil, what an interesting post, really - you don't need your dripping irony pen ("hilarious-max" thought it often is ;-).
Thank you. I was aware of much, and what I didn't know, I get.
My take: For example, the P&J today has stories on the beginnings of a Scottish economic recovery, and how the Aberdeen area has managed to resist the general downward trend - we've spent more in the shops aswell apparently (I think that was on the BBC). But anyway, it shows what a healthy economy could be like - if only the whole of Scotland, and not just a corner of it, had one. Living in it, the importance of that corner...
Back to your info.
Importantly, we have to remember we have been lied to about the oil resources since they were discovered, so you can't expect to believe anything this government says about it. How does that affect your figures?
But that aside, re operational realities, you know, and I know, but do you think Gordon and pals know!
I don't think they do (I mean they don't bother/understand) and they're looking at any way to (be seen to) boost revenue - would it be so they look better to the IMF? OK, that's a guess, but aren't Gordon and Alistair just attempting to "fill in" their black hole? (I think to make themselves feel better - I know it's not a plan!) As that's what's been used in the past - oil. (They can't think of another way.)
I think that is their intention, a panic driven reaction - they are long past rational (and never made it to intelligent)!
To continue, I answered your call (from the previous thread) for a few years trial of Scotland keeping what is Scotland's, with my #156:
But the fact that it hasn't been done up 'til now tells us what we need to know, I think.
You hinted with your "That's why these days I work on alternatives..." that you know about renewables? Isn’t Scotland leading with that?
Thank you for being factual :-)
I am a nip. (Should I have treated you badly from the start!)
Complain about this comment
One thing being picked up by the English press and indeed the IMF are Darlings almost miraculous predicitons of recovery.
Darling has the economy improving by 1.25% in 2010 then by 3.5% in 2011. the IMF have predicted that the UK economy will contnue shrinking in 2010.
If, as everyone else is saying bar Labour, the UK economy doesn't recover at the rate Labour are saying then the UK really is up sh*t creek.
It's now obvious why he is helping small oil companies to further explore Scotland's seas.
Who will Scottish Labour blame when public sector jobs and services start being shed?
OK, sorry about that question, let me rephrase - Will the Scottish media still maintain that cuts are the fault of the SNP?
Complain about this comment
Funny thing thing is! there is some core evidence of 1970's style labour, in as much as the new 50% tax band on high earners.
You can almost hear the queues of Blairite
s burning their financial times.
"Summer time and the living is easy"
Complain about this comment
Apologies for straying on topic, but in case anyone wants to rate Darling's budget I've added a new poll at Brigadoon.
Complain about this comment
Back to the budget,
Is the Scottish Government honest in there quest, have we been ripped off by 129 million?
I am also confused. On the BBC website we are told we are seeing a cut, then later on the same page we are told we are going to see our budget rise by well over 2.2 billion pounds... why are we seeing a cut now if we are going to get billions later?
Maybe I have missed something.
Complain about this comment
#145 derekbarker: Just a sop for the plebs I suspect (or should that be SOP - Standard Operating Procedure?!). See The big hole in the 2009 Budget on this site for more about it. The super-rich will always find a way past the tax man I'm afraid.
Complain about this comment
One perceives - with difficulty, as the media beyond your shores are not exactly focused on the matter - that that Chancer of the Chequer Board fellow has presented an
unprecedentedly grave crisis budget following the ever so reluctant admission that the UK economy has crashed not to the floor but through it, never to recover fully . . . ever. One learns that it is being conceded that the public deficit has exploded, that unemployment is increasing rapidly and that the blighted Blighty economy is now expected to contract this year by 3.5 per cent. Dearie me.
Condolences to you anglo-unionist chappies who have landed yourselves with the unenviable task of persuading the electorate of brave Caledonia of the 'benefits' and 'wisdom' of remaining aboard a sinking ship as the waves rise higher and higher while the orchestra plays Pomp and Circumstance with declining conviction and growing apprehension as the passengers reach for their lifejackets. Still, it is not a bad tune, I suppose, if you like that sort of thing. It has definitely got something. I know that, as a youthful Italian pop singer with an unusually splendid voice is currently enjoying some success on the European mainland by flogging a recording of a little romantic ditty set to its unquestionably rousing tune. Perhaps not the sort of rousing that was envisaged by British nationalists but rousing nonetheless. When an empire declines, its paraphernalia live on, even if in a not highly respectfully altered form.
Anyway, a record UK public-finances deficit of 28.4 billion of your English pounds, somewhat more than forecast! Tut, tut. UK Gross National Debt now at 50 per cent of Gross Domestic Product! Whatever will Mr and Mrs Boggins of Sidcup make of all of this if they can tear themselves away for long enough from the television soap operas that the Great British public has sadly become addicted to, not to mention the booze and ciggies and other addictive substances. Correction: they will doubtless notice the traditional increase in duty on the booze and ciggies, if there has indeed been such an increase on this occasion, and will lament the fact, predictably, before turning back to Coronation Street. Is that still running? They say that, if Shakespeare were alive today, he would be earning his living by writing for the soaps. If that is so, one hopes that someone is having the foresight to preserve at least some of the scripts, as they will be needed in a few hundred years to teach school pupils of the glories of the English language. But I am digressing.
UK unemployment at 6.7 per cent over the last quarter! 2.1 million on the dole, in other words (a figure expected to rise to 3.3 million next year, giving a UK rate of unemployment of 10.5 per cent then!!!), increasing public expenditure horrendously on associated state benefits as government tax take drops and the UK experiences its gravest economic crisis since 1945, with Gross National Debt expected to reach 58 per cent of GDP this year and 68 per cent next year! Clearly, the UK government is in such a weak position that it cannot be expected even to consider a further economic-stimulus programme, apparently. Let us hope that one will not be needed. But it will, won't it, if the truth be told?
Up the creek without a paddle. Rule Britannia! Forgive my mirth, but I know how certain anglo-unionists make a virtue of that when it suits them. It is not that one does not take the matter seriously or feel sorry for those who are suffering from all of this. Pride just will come before a fall, however, and that cannot but present itself as amusing to some degree. No one can say that anglo-unionism has not puffed itself up with pride only to have its bubble burst spectacularly. RIP, Britannia. From its ashes something better may arise, at least in Scotland. One hopes so.
Complain about this comment
Anyone see Andy Kerr on Newsnight there? His hatred and fear of the SNP is palpable and he just can't contain his invective against Scotland.
I can't wait to see the vile Labour Party annihilated in the UK and the Scottish General Elections.
The likes of Kerr and Jim Murphy are a dreadful disgrace to politics and to public life.
Complain about this comment
136. sneckedagain
If that is all true then you have my apologies. But if it is true then it is sad that most Tory youth (like myself) can only find out about these things online; not through schooling. That is pretty damning for our education system, considering I remember being tought many times in history, economics especially- that Linnwood etc were examples of the unbalanced employer-employee relationship.
I even recall one doc. in class 5 odd years ago about the development of working class representation (chartists-through Scargil etc) and Linnwood was explained as (if my memory serves) a illustrations of the themes 'militant action', 'undermining the economy' etc.
So apologies, I shan't doubt your word (given that you were there!). Its just a sad reflection on the quality of education in Scottish/English schooling.
Complain about this comment
147. Thomas_Porter
"On the BBC website we are told we are seeing a cut, then later on the same page we are told we are going to see our budget rise by well over 2.2 billion pounds... why are we seeing a cut now if we are going to get billions later?
Maybe I have missed something."
Your not the only one struck by the curious BBC definition of impartial reporting, and quality / accurate journalism.
:)
Complain about this comment
Re 136
An excellent post. I know we don't agree on everything, but every word in your post is true.
I remember following the demise of the steel industry as an ideological youngster and the feeling of total and utter despair over the wrecking of a perfectly viable industry.
It made me realise that the state owning assets was not always good and should be avoided where possible. If the Scottish Steel industry had been in the private sector it possibly would have survived.
the one thing it has done though is ensured Scotland's tories will never be anything other than a minority party.
I knew people affected by the closure of the steel industry, the effects were truely awful. I hope the current recession doesn't bite as deep.
The job creation aspects of the packages announced by all governments never seems to help industrial and construction workers. In the Highlands we are again witnessing our young moving south for work, many will never come back.
Communities ruined forever, families split up forever.
Governments of whatever colour never face the human aspect of what they do. It is all about statistics, opinion polls and focus groups. Oh for some new political thinking.
Complain about this comment
Re 140
For once we agree wansanshoo. London is no more deprived than many areas of Scotland.
Will you also agree that it is wrong to remove money from rural Scotlands health budget to spend on the central belt?
Which is what is now happening. Apparently rural Scotland is a wealthy place to live.
Complain about this comment
Re 147
Thomas I watched newsnight Scotland and remaion confused over this issue. Are we suffering from a cut or not?
If we are suffering a cut are we being cut more than our fair share?
The truth I suspect will be hard to establish.
Complain about this comment
148. At 10:48pm on 22 Apr 2009, forfar-loon wrote:
derekbarker: Just a sop for the plebs I suspect (or should that be SOP - Standard Operating Procedure?!).
SOP- almost has a mechancical ring to it forfar-loon, maybe the cog has been stuck and some oil has been applied, freeing the wheel of standard operating movement.
Yes sir, it seems like a good time to be thinking about new mechanical and engineering terms and movements.
" the fish are jumping and the weathers fine"
Complain about this comment
153. northhighlander
"remember following the demise of the steel industry as an ideological youngster and the feeling of total and utter despair over the wrecking of a perfectly viable industry."
I beg to suggest that the Steel industry was not a 'perfectly viable industry' under public ownership, and since the 1988 privatisation the turnaround as been called 'remarkable' by notible experts.
For example, as reciently as 1980/1 the British Steel Corporation was making a total loss of £1 billions on a turnaround of just £3 billions. By the early 1980's BSC had become fundamentally uncompetitive. Indeed it had seen its market share halved on the 1970's levels. These are not signs of a healthy and viable industry under nationalised control; I'd venture its due to the politicisation of the industry; and the protection from the benefits of market competition that were the cause.
It was overstaffed, and between 1980/1 & 1986/7 as employee numbers were halved labour productivity in BSC more than doubled. It's output recovering. The process of economic management leading to final privatisation under the Thatcher governments can be credited for that success.
According to my source, the book 'Privatization and economic performance' By Matthew Bishop, John Anderson Kay, Colin P. Mayer it by 1986 had become the "strong firm in a weak industry."
(I'll post my link to my source seperately incase BEEB doesnt like it, you can read the relevant pages on google.books, specifically pg 162-164.)
Complain about this comment
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=3Zzl0O-WjIMC&pg=PA162&dq=steel+privatisation+1988#PPA162,M1
The source for my stats and claims as per 157
Complain about this comment
#158, google books description,
"The contributors here examine and evaluate what has been learned from the programs now completed, and what remains to be done."
Not read the piece, obviously, but that to me immediately implies that the authors view privatization as a process that was never adequately "completed". Says something of what viewpoint they may take throughout.
Complain about this comment
159. pattymkirkwood
Still a valid source of academic material; and they do support their conclusions with hard evidence. Its hardly populist propaganda.
Its economic fact that outlines why people believe in privatisation. The fact that it argues for further/more/continued privatisation doesnt undermine the validity as a source of facts/evidence/opinion; and debate.
Whats your point?
Complain about this comment
Point is if the blurb sets out that privatization has not gone far enough, perhaps those are not the people we should be listening too right now when privatization has been exposed as little more than a sham especially when the Govt has to step in to save x, y, z ... does little but create oligarchs.
Complain about this comment
Northighlander # 154
The geographics of the rural communities was one of the main reasons the formula was put together originally. On that basis no one can disagree with your point of view.
Urban areas however need funding to drag them out of a downward spiral, London's east end of course is receiving in excess of 10 billion pounds investment, and it''s regeneration was officially part of the Olympic bid.
We can find a minimum of 10 billion to regenerate east London, but not to help communities whom the Barnett Formula originally targeted.
Combine the 114 % Barnett Formula to the 10 billion investment in London and you get the idea why I want self determination for Scotland.
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
# 126 Wee_Scamp
As I mentioned above I was no great lover of Margaret Thatcher but I stand by the bones of my posting which was that she was what the country (UK) needed at that particular moment in time.
You mentioned Tony Benn in passing. I had a lot of respect for Tony Benn, as a man of principal, but never agreed with his politics as it was too left wing for me. I flirted with left wing politics once, as a young man in England (no SNP to vote for), until I saw that they were out to gain control for themselves with no respect for the people whom they pretended to represent. Does that remind you of a certain political party which is running (or should I say ruining) the UK now?
Complain about this comment
The poulation of England is less than 85% of the U.K. yet receive 85p in every pound according to the Barnett Formula, secondly, why should Yorkshire/ Humberside, East Midlands, West Midlands and Eastern Area subsidise the balance of England.
North East £8,177 - 111%
North West £7,798 - 106%
Yorkshire and Humberside £7,188 - 98%
East Midlands £6,491 - 88%
West Midlands £7,065 - 96%
Eastern £6,144 - 83%
London £8,404 - 114%
South East £6,304 - 86%
South West £6,677 - 91%
Or, as I strongly suspect, does the unionist Barnett Formula argument only apply when verbally attacking Scotland ?
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
re157
Dean
When you read any source it is important to remember that there is always an alternative opinion.
Had the Scottish Steel industry been supported in the way the rest of British Steel was, it is a perfectly reasonable opinion to offer that a more productive plant would have meant a more profitable company.
Anyway as i say the legacy of this act of pure political dogma is that the tories will remain a minority party in Scotland. If Dave wins south of the border, I suspect Independence willl gain support in Scotland, because despite his rhetoric I suspect he has no real grasp of Scottish Politics.
Complain about this comment
John Swinney has just been interviewed by Gary Roberston on BBC Radio Scotland (08:21).
Swinney pointed out that the cuts announced by the UK Government were as a result of that same Governments handling of the economy.
This seemed to upset Robertson who bacame a little agitated and suggested three areas that the SNP could target in order to make these savings:
Don't send the Scottish ballet to China.
Move Mike Russell from his constitutional minister role.
Abandon the referendum
Fantastic Gary, that'll take care of around 1 million. What about the other 499 million?
Alistair Darling is expected to be interviewed later. I wonder if Gary will ask Darling to scrap Trident, get rid of the useless Jim Murphy or abandon ID cards?
He's on now, let's see.
Complain about this comment
#122 Dean.
Don't worry. I was there.
Second row of the very tight side gallery listening to a wee prat of a YC from Glasgow spouting about how he and some mates had got on the pages of some local rag following a "confrontation" with the local YS at a demo over a community centre.
She was an amazing orator in person but then, much as now, my presence alone in that hall lowered the average age by about 40.
As you see from the posts of others, Dean, those times are still fresh in the minds of many who were there.
Rightly or wrongly, the policies of the Tory Party were seen as political dogma, application of an economic outlook foreign not only to these shores but specifically to the social structure of Scotland.
As northhighlander writes above, come the UK general election, it won't matter if CMD wins in England. It will merely demonstrate that the imaginary line across the country is actually real, and that Scotland will reject Tory rule.
I'm betting on 5-6 Tory seats tops, 1 minimum. In Order of "winnability"
Either of D&G or Mundell's Seat in Dumfries, Clydesdale or Tweedale. Not both. NuLab will fight tooth and claw to take/keep one of them and let the other go.
The Murph goes down to Jackson Carlaw in Renfrewshire East. See posts passim.
Will Northern British NuLab defend Nigel Griffiths in Edinburgh South ? I think that although he has a good reputation as a "constituency man", the build up of personal scandals over the Bliar/Broon years will just be too much.
Outside shots at
Darling in Edinburgh SW, Don't forget that Malcolm Rifkind held the old Pentlands seat for a good while against all odds and there is still a good on-the-ground organisation there. This could be a Portillo moment.
The Sacred Lodestone of Forsyth's old seat in Stirling. If this goes it will be a UK Tory majority in the 110+ range
One of the Perthshire Seats, based purely on "local liking" for Aunty Bella and the Scottish Tories rather than CMD.
Let the games begin.
Complain about this comment
I suspect the Westminster mob are desperately trying to work out ways of scrapping ID/Trident cards without losing face or acknowledging the Scottish stance on nuclear anything!
Anyone else less than cock a hoop about the news item on Mr Murphy attending SNP cabinet meetings?
Complain about this comment
Poor Alistair Darling, reduced to trotting out the "It's a choice between Labour and the Conservatives". I sense the usual slogans being dusted down for the forthcoming election.
Darling stuttered and stammered his way through the interview - Robertson was dismissive of him, though I would have liked to have Darling defend Trident, Murphy and ID cards.
He could also have asked about the merit of wasting money on last weeks Glasgow cabinet visit.
Complain about this comment
If we're going to be dusting down the old slogans, how about revisiting
"Labour Isn't Working" ?
(shiver down spine)
Complain about this comment
Excellent post 136.
Complain about this comment
#157 Deanthetoryboy -
This from #153 northhighlander [The emphases are my own] -
"I remember following the demise of the steel industry as an ideological youngster and the feeling of total and utter despair over the wrecking of a perfectly viable industry
It made me realise that the state owning assets was not always good and should be avoided where possible. If the Scottish Steel industry had been in the private sector it possibly would have survived."
And this from your #157 -
"I beg to suggest that the [Scottish] steel industry was not a 'perfectly viable industry' under public ownership."
Am I to take it that your seeming inability to read is another "sad reflection on the quality of education in Scottish/English schooling." as lamented in your #151
Complain about this comment
Post 168:
Jim Murphy is hoping that he'll just be sitting with the Scottish cabinet, uncomfortable enough for Murphy that will be, but it isn't quite like that.
What Salmond stated in his conference speech was that all groups with an interest in the Scottish economy will be at this meeting. My bet is that Murphy will be asked to defend the UK governments public spending cuts, amongst other things.
I don't have any worries that Murphy will be held to account. He is making the mistake of believing the Scottish media are representative of Scottish public opinion - he is in for a shock.
Complain about this comment
I'd like to echo the sentiments of others by highlighting the excellent comment at 136.
Many years ago as an apprentice I was taken to Ravenscraig steelworks as part of a course work we were doing.
The shear scale of the place was awe inspiring and we were told how advanced it was as well as how efficient it was. Gartcosh, I believe, was closed down deliberately in order to remove a vital part of the process - and with that the chain was weakened.
Stories like this are all too frequent in Scotland.
Scotland's real hidden shame isn't bigotry, it is the distastefull underbelly of Unionism and it's illegitimate sibling - the 'Scottish Media'.
Complain about this comment
173. Salmond constantly makes the mistake of believing he is representative of all Scottish opinion.
Despite constant demonstrations to the contrary, it still doesn't seem to sink in how wrong he is.
There's a pattern here somewhere...but I just can't put my finger on it....
Complain about this comment
168/169
would that be the trident that the UK are continuing to build despite the fact that we don't know whether the weapons will actually fit?
bad news about Murphy, if he does loose his seat I predict he will get a job on the BBC as an "EXPERT". (no change there then , as he has never had a real job in his life!)
and ID cards- i have a bus pass which is being used as an ID CARD.
ps 168 , murphy might actually learn how to run a country, as he is a part of the worst government the UK has ever had !
Sid
Complain about this comment
Wansanshoo, are you digging up that discredited nonsense that London somehow receives 114% of...something.
You don't actually make it clear, what does "114% Barnett Formula" mean?
Leaving aside the fact (and it is a fact, whether you like it or not) that London, Europe's richest region, is a net contributor to the UK Treasury, please can you share YOUR evidence for this long-dead nationalist claim?
Complain about this comment
Ah, just read Swinney's response to the budget.
So, while the nationalists are wailing on here about the scale of public borrowing and national debt, Swinney is actually arguing for more borrowing claiming:
"We need public spending to help us out of the recession and we don't need public spending cuts."
Do the nationalists on here agree that even more borrowing, with an even greater national debt, is the answer?
Complain about this comment
Thomas P
Re the confusion over whether the scottish budget is being cut or increased.
Here's my understanding of it.
The 3 yearly public spending review set out Scottish Block Grants for 3 years (funnily enough)
I'm not nerdy enough to have the figures and cannot be bothered looking, but lets say they were
Year 1 : 30Bn
Year2 : 31Bn
Year 3 : 32 Bn
These figures (or the correct ones!!) have been used by the Scottish Government to budget on.
With efficiency saving announced by Darling yesterday these figures will be reduced.
e.g.
Year 1 : 30
Year 2 : 30.5
Year 3 : 31
(Again - not the exact figures, but you get the concept)
Hence SNP claims of cuts to the Scottish Budget of around 500M. This is relative to what they were previously told they would receive.
However, those clever NuLab Spinners - still clam that the Scottish budget will continue to grow year on year, and that next years budget will see an increase from this year.
They're very clever you know!
No-one will ever see through it!
Well not if the Scottish media have anything to do with it anyway!
Complain about this comment
178 Expat
Swinney, as Scottish Finance Minister is speaking in Scottish Government terms, set in the current constitutional arrangement.
Uner those terms his statement ....
"We need public spending to help us out of the recession and we don't need public spending cuts."
... is absolutely correct.
Public spending cuts won't be good for Scotland.
Do you think otherwise?
Borrowing doesn't come into it as, under the current arrangement it is not an option open to him.
Or are you wanting Mr Swinney and the "Nats" to set UK fiscal policy now?
Probably not a bad idea - shame he has not been doing it for the last 12 years!
Complain about this comment
Good article in the Independent and even better on the Daily Mash!
Complain about this comment
Hi sneckedagain,
Re your post 136.
A view from the customer might be useful. I worked in a car body plant in Oxford for 25 years.
As the pressures were applied to close the Ravenscraig complex, management and unions spoke up in support of the products from Ravenscraig.
They described the steel strip as the finest in the world and expressed their concern at the costs which would incur to the car plant if they had to accept supply from elsewhere.
Ravenscraig and Gartcosh were closed and those of us who thought that there might have been an element of exageration in the case for retaining them were soon humbled by the experiences which we had to endure when the supply was switched.
The consistant quality of the output from Gartcosh and Ravenscraig was sorely missed as one batch was too brittle and the next was too soft from the new supplier.
The ensuing struggle to adjust the press tools to cope with changes in maleability meant that the plant now went into continual overtime to try to maintain pressings' quality.
An unseen consequence to this was that our output quality was thrown into doubt as well as our ability to be competative. Within a decade we too lost our work and jobs and the work transferred to Germany.
Thank you Mrs. Thatcher.
Best wishes.
Complain about this comment
After his comedy debut on YouTube on Tuesday, it was no surprise to see Duff Gordon developing more dance moves on Sky News this morning when defending Capn. Darling's budget. Sadly the new video is not yet available on their website.
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
Just as you were all digesting the latest titbits of horrendous news about the ailing UK economy yesterday, a fascinating article appeared in the French press in which the
endlessly compelling topic of Anglo-American cowboy capitalism was further ventilated, the demise of which has engendered the present Crisis in conjunction with the incompetence of politicians in the anglophone world: "This crisis stems from a total absence of regulation and from connivance between financiers and politicians." Oh dear,
"connivance"! That suggests something worse than mere incompetence, does it not? It indicates complicity in the vast Ponzi scheme that was Anglo-Saxon cowboy capitalism. Let us, therefore, explore the matter further.
It transpires that a retired financier, whom I shall refer to as the Wolf, not least as he refers to himself in that way in a recently published book which is to be made into a movie, is spilling the beans, confirming the francophone world's view of the anglophone one, as if that were necessary. Oh yes, even before it has rumbled to a conclusion, the Crisis is to be made into a movie. First they fleece you and then they fleece you again by telling you the story of how they fleeced you followed by the movie of the book of how they fleeced you, and, in doing so, they fleece you all over again. Enterprising. Anyway, the Wolf, whose specialty one may suppose from his monicker to have been actually more along the lines of devouring the innocent and unwary than fleecing them, but let us not split hairs, describes the realm of Anglo-Saxon finance as a decadent world where a lethal combination of money, drugs and dishonesty reigned supreme. And this is what you entrusted your life savings to, missus? You were fleeced.
In this cocaine-fuelled milieu the frontier between ambition and cupidity is ill defined and frequently crossed, one learns to one's no very great surprise. What the Wolf says was demanded of him when he arrived in a well-known finance house on Wall Street was to sell shares by whatever means he could contrive, even offering investors totally worthless verbal guarantees . . . lies, in other words. Tut, tut. Vast sums of money made on pure dishonest speculation were then siphoned off to tax havens and Swiss bank accounts, which the President of France was so insistent upon having something substantial done about at the recent G20 summit in London.
As for the Anglo-Saxon financial regulatory authorities, the Wolf ridicules their "incompetence and ineffectuality", commenting that much fraud, while sophisticated, can easily be detected if the trouble is merely taken to enquire into it effectively. The regulatory authorities, however, tended not to have the smartest guys on their staff or, at least, not for long
enough to be of much use to them.
It is frequently remarked that the Crisis was inevitable and that there was nothing that politicians could have done either to foresee or prevent it. What does the Wolf think? He maintains that the Crisis results from "a total absence of regulation and from connivance between politicians and financiers". In other words, the chaps with their snouts in the trough of public-service subreption on a grand scale have been in bed with the wolves. Expressed differently and mixing metaphors with abandon, this would be the gamekeeper turning poacher, would it not? Or something along those lines? Hence the disrepute into which UK politicians are falling at a rate of rapidity which may well propel Labour out of office at the next UK general election, which may be held very soon to limit the political damage both to the Labour Party and the UK state.
Let us be clear. Our Anglo-Saxon financier is saying that Anglo-Saxon politicians in office encouraged speculation and that the bankers quite lawfully obliged, leading the system, in so far as it deserves to be referred to as such, into chaos. Had politicians ordered a stop to these practices, of which they were aware, the Crisis could have been avoided, he states unequivocally. Can we/should we blame the present Labour UK government for having played a part in causing the worst economic crisis in the UK since the Second World
War? Yes, frankly. A big boy did it and ran away? I don't think so, Mr Brown.
Time for Scotland to wake up and protect itself against the UK wolves. I may be crying wolf but, as there are wolves out there . . .
Complain about this comment
180. Ah, so perhaps he wouldn't consider 'greater spending' a viable option if he had to do the borrowing too? A rather simplistic viewpoint you have there.
I rather think he's just sticking to the SNP's age-old tactic of simply disagreeing with whatever the UK government of the day is proposing.
Also, that the SNP campaigned for less financial regulation in 2007 plus consider greater spending and borrowing a solution to dropping tax revenues and spiralling debt....I for one am pretty glad they haven't been running UK fiscal policy for the past 12 years.
Anyway, love your post 179 where you say:
e.g.
Year 1 : 30
Year 2 : 30.5
Year 3 : 31
However, those clever NuLab Spinners - still clam that the Scottish budget will continue to grow year on year, and that next years budget will see an increase from this year.
You're right. How could they possibly claim that 30.5 is an increase on 30? And then to dare to claim 31 is an increase on 30.5? Astonishing.
Complain about this comment
157
Though Mrs Thatcher and her hatchet man McGregor eventually killed the Scottish steel industry it was nationalisation of the industry that made that possible.
The UK steel industry was in a pretty poor position when the dirty deed was done but political considerations over-ruled all sensible restructuring and the best performing bits were closed and their function and production transferred to less succesful plants down south.
The end of steel making in Scotland also helped destroy shipbuilding, engineering and coal mining as Scotland's industrial heart was strongly integrated.
If you take the high road out of Hamilton up to Strathaven you can look back across almost all of Central Scotland right to the Lothians and see a panoply of communities which no longer have any reason for existence as they were built on coal, steel and engineering. Therein lies the genesis of our break down in civic society.
Its called the Union Dividend.
Complain about this comment
Reluctant-Expat is yet again making false assertions and posting comments aiming at insulting - they will be ignored.
However, in comment 178 he asks:
Do the nationalists on here agree that even more borrowing, with an even greater national debt, is the answer?
Let me answer in the style of Reluctant-Expat himself.
How many times must it be repeated before the self deluding bunch of followers of that pseudo religion called Unionism actually begin to take it in.
The answer to the ever increasing debt mountain created by those in Westminster who still follow the imperialistic mindset that is over 100 years out of date is for Scotland to say enough !!
Independence for Scotland will allow us to shake free of an anachronistic London centred establishment that still operates under class principles and an old boy network and public school ethos that looks down on those whom they 'serve' and believes that London/England is god.
The very economic mire that the UK finds itself in is precisely what Unionists have been squealing would happen to an independent Scotland when oil ran out.
Guess what, the Unionists have managed to create such a Scotland already !!
I've said it before, only a lunatic would point to the shear scale of misery his side had caused as proof that their system is best.
Only someone who really didn't care what became of Scotland would continue to suggest NO CHANGE.
So, 'Reluctant-Expat', who do you suggest Scots turn to in the next election eh? More of Labour perhaps. or is it Cameron or even Clegg?
You see, the problem here is that no matter who is in power in Westminster, Scotland is at best an afterthought - at worst punished as it is suffers from collateral damage caused by Labour's clumsy blunderbus attacks on the SNP.
The UK is finished, bankrupt - there is no money left for anything. Scotland continued to languish near the bottom of European social living tables even in the so called boom times.
What awaits Scotland over the next 20 - 30 years if we remain in this Union?
Ponder that question 'Reluctant-Expat', then wince.
Complain about this comment
177 Reluctant Ex Pat.
You asked who the source was, well it's none other than Unionist puppet Sir Kenneth Calman, here's what he had to say:
Asked if the formula was fair to British taxpayers, he said: "It's pretty good for Scotland - it depends if you think that's fair or not. But I don't think it reflects the needs.
"It depends where you live in England. It's quite important you don't think about England as a single place - you can break down the regions quite nicely. If you look at London for example, you would see London does pretty well."
--------------------------------------------------------
It's a strange world when a Unionist leader agree's with,as you put it, ''discredited nonsense'' and '' a long dead nationalist claim''
As for your comments on London's wealth, I could not agree more,I spend 21 days per month in London and have done since 2001, in fact it is precisely with that in mind that I again ask the question: Why does London receive 114% ratio within the Barnett Formula?
As for the source of this information, may I suggest you do as I did and research prior to making misleading comments.
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
How curious are some of the forecast figures the Chancellor provided us with yesterday. Example, next 4 years deficits: year 1 = £175B, year 2 = £173B, year 3 = £140B, year 4 = £118B, total £703 Billion.
So in year 4 the deficit will be 118 not 117 or 119.
Such preposterouslly precise figures are a nonsense. The estimates supplied late last year are now seen to be grossly inaccurate.
They don't know, they guess and they make the stuff up.
Complain about this comment
149 FranklyFrancophone
Gosh what a pickle we're in. Unemployment at 6.1% and rising and public debt rising to c. 70% caused by bailing out banks. Surely the end of Perfidious Albion is in sight at last after these two centuries of chips and fish!
Oh how I wish we could be more like...well...France where unemployment has remained stubbornly around 8-10% for the past decade and is rising higher. Where public debt was around 65% five years ago and is surely well North of that by now. How I yearn for that heavily unionised society where simple arguments can be settled like gentlemen, by blockading an autoroute. I could go on, but as you amply demonstrate, making a post longer doesn't necessarily make it funnier.
PS: Great article in the Times yesterday about Sarko's "size" issues. Apparantly whilst the British PM and the German Chancellor manage travel on planes operated by their national airlines, this is not enough to convey La Gloire that surrounds the Presidente of the Umpteenth Republic. His personal plane has been deemed to be "not big enough" and a large Airbus (with its hated British wings) is being kitted out with all the accoutrements of the modern statesman for his personal use.
I look forward to seeing it parked provocatively alongside Airforce One any day now. Little man...BIG plane;-)
Complain about this comment
#190 Anglophone
Ah the wit, the elegance of phrase, the atavistic dislike of the French by the English ...
And you thought to stereotype us?
Fortunately, my relatives and friends in England don't share your view of your neighbours in any direction.
Complain about this comment
Hi anglophone,
Do you have anything positive to add to the discussions here?
Reading between your lines, you give me the impression that you seem to have quite a lot of pent up fury within you.
Would you care to share your expectations for the future of the UK with us?
Best wishes.
Complain about this comment
#189 Rochcarlie
You are quite right. They just make it up! Or as some commentators are saying Darling is living in fantasyland.
But we know where we are now. In a terrible mess. We can all make our conclusions on that and vote accordingly, next June.
Freedom
Complain about this comment
#93 oldnat
On a point of puire pedantry (it's been that kind of day, sorry), I take it you actually mean ABN AMRO?Complain about this comment
"The new rate, announced by Chancellor Alistair Darling in his Budget statement on Wednesday, breaks Labour's 2005 manifesto pledge not to raise income tax for high earners during this Parliament."
Another bwoken pwomise. Where's Wendy when you need her! (Not that I mind a tax hike for the rich, mind you).
Complain about this comment
Happy St Georges Day to all our English co-contributors!
Vive la France@Anglophone!
Complain about this comment
If the recession is longer and deeper than Brown/Draling are predicting, the level of debt could lead to Britain’s facing a run on the pound and the possibility of having to turn to the IMF for emergency loans.
The truth for even the most hardcore of Unionists is that there needs to be root and branch reform of Westminster. The FPTP system of electing Governments has to change as does the culture within Whitehall.
The days of empire need to be consigned to history for good. The UK is no longer a major player on the world stage, the pretence that it is should be dropped.
The draconian laws and the erosion of civil liberties need to be addressed as does expensive follies like ID cards.
The Union could have worked, however the point of no return has been reached for Scotland. An independent Scotland will provide an opportunity for England to re-invent itself and it's system of governance.
It will also provide an opportunity for the creation of the Union that should have been but never was. A Union of equals based on a mutual respect and co-operation.
That's the kind of Union we ought to have had, not the imperialistic militaristic nonsense so adored by the insecure Scottish Unionists that sought to impose it's will on Scotland.
Where are the Scottish Unionist modernists and reformists? A wind is blowing, bend or break !!
Complain about this comment
#194 Fit Like?
Yes I have those kind of days as well. You are of course right. It was a "puire" mistake. (and I bet you saw that typo just as you were pressing the Submit button!) ;-)}
Complain about this comment
Apparently the BBC has apologised to Alex but Ian Gray (maths teacher) still accused him of getting it wrong, sad man.
Bailout : Gordon’s £1.4 Trillion Fail Time to jump ship pronto.
Complain about this comment
Expat #185
Sorry to keep focussing on your posts alone, but they do rather stand out from the crowd!
If my argument is simplistic, it is because the current constitutional setup makes it so.
The Scottish Financial Secretary's (currently J. Swinney Esq.) remit, as bestowed on him from Westminster on high via the Scotland Act - is how to spend the Scottish Block Grant to the maximum benefit of Scotland.
Do you dispute that?
He has no concern as to how that Block Grant is raised.
Do you dispute that?
Given this remit, he is absolutely correct to state that cuts to Scottish Public services, via cuts to the block grant, are not in Scotlands interest.
Do you dispute that?
If you answer "Yes" to any of those questions - perhaps we are in agreement after all .....
That the current constitutional setup is not fit for purpose, and that the Scottish Government should indeed have responsibility for both raising and spending Scotland's budget.
We're getting somewhere at last. I knew you'd come around.
Complain about this comment
Hamish Mcrae's piece in The Indy, referred to above, is a pretty decent read.
Complain about this comment
Now this is good English pride here.
Nice to see.
Complain about this comment
143 Aye Write
Glad to hear that things are holding up around Aberdeen. I'm slightly surprised because usually when oil prices are low, regardless of what's happening in the rest of the country, there are tumbleweeds blowing up and down Union Street.
I wouldn't read to much into the stories about "being lied to about oil reserves". As I mentioned, back in 1970 and based on the technology available at the time, oil was expected to run out around 1990. The hike in oil prices in 1974 spurred exploration and many new new reserves both physical and economic (i.e. now worthwhile extracting) were discovered. Reporting oil reserves, especially for SEC registered companies is fraught with legal problems and companies have tended to be very conservative. The fact that reported reserves have increased over time is normal. It's not a conspiracy and therefore sadly very, very dull!
I do now work on renewables as well as oil & gas. There are indeed some promising renewable projects in Scotland but there are also many in England, Wales and NI. As the investors involved tend to have a UK wide presence it is far too early to say whether someone is "leading" anything as such. I suspect that as renewables form the cornerstone of an independent Scotland's long-term energy security, there may have been some breathless declarations on leading the way into a brave new world. I'd give it a few years to check the veracity of that one.
Regardless of parochial oneupmanship, the need for a solid base of renewables is pressing (and nuclear too...I'm not a zealot) and it is maddening that, when the UK as a whole has some of the best renewable generation prospects in the world, the government has completely missed the boat and handed the technological first mover advantage to others. Another depressing fall-out from NuLabour's received wisdom that the whole economy revolved around financial services (North and South of the border). It will be noted in the history books that when others were thinking hard about energy security, the Labour Government downgraded the post of Energy Minster to a shared portfolio with Communications and Postal Services. All of which goes to show that modern politics of all persuasions is jam-packed with people who know nothing about the real economy, hence the fact that we will no doubt still have many social inclusiveness outreach co-ordinators when the lights go out;-)
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The FT states: "today the English have reason of their own for bitterness. Devolution is a gross injustice towards them – they make up, after all, four-fifths of the British population. English vexation is stimulated further by the preponderance of Scots in the present government and has been given a final twist by a financial implosion that looks almost like a Caledonian conspiracy."
Bitterness? Is it not about time England lost that chip on both shoulders over Scottish devolution? It's hardly taken five minutes for them to start whining about "gross injustice". They should try 300 years of it and see how that feels!
This line of reasoning reminds me of the BBC's shameful news priorities: "Blizzard in Scotland - not news. Snowflake in London - front page news." We see that rule-of thumb applied every single time!
The funniest part of this FT comment is they are starting to believe Brown and Darling were sent by the Scots to put the final nail in the coffin of glorious English Nationhood. If only those two jokers had it in them! The utter mince they've made of the UK economy is down to plain incompetence.
However, if the price of indpendence is having th English blame the Scots for their descent into bankruptcy, then I'll take it. We were always going to get the blame anyway!
Complain about this comment
196 Bluelaw
Idiot...St George is a concept imported from France during the unpleasant imperialistic military dictatorship imposed here between the 11th and 13th Centuries.
Any knowledgeable Englishman will tell you that St Edmund and St Alban, who died resisting pagan Danish invaders are far better candidates as a patron Saint. They were even English, unlike St George who was probably Turkish. Though in George's favour he did hail from slightly closer to home that St Andrew who was a citizen of Judea.
Otherwise, thank you for your best wishes.
Complain about this comment
200. Dear Lord. Do you not realise that we pay a share of all borrowing? Do you not realise the impact heavy borrowing has on our future budgets? Do you not realise the impact it has on our major markets? Do you not realise the impact it has on our currency? Do you not realise the impact it has on our interest rates? Do you not realise the impact it has on inflation?
If Swinney "has no concern how the Block Grant is raised", it just shows what a scarily short-sighted politician he is.
(Although those of us who are capable of independent thought will have been aware of that for some time.)
Complain about this comment
191 OldNat
You seem to be a nice chap so I'm sorry to disappoint. I like my Scottish neighbours, visit often and still have many friends there.
I like the French too and feel that there are many aspects of their day to day lives that we could do with imitating. I just can't resist forming a square and only shooting when I see the whites of their eyes when your Franco-Scottish co-contributor pens one of his endless contributions.
Complain about this comment
#178 Reluctant-Expat -
"Do the nationalists agree that even more borrowing, with an even greater national debt, is the answer?"
At this moment in time, I very much doubt that you'll find a clear and definitive consensus - either amongst the nationalist cohort or any other interest group - as to the answer to this crisis.
This is for a couple of reasons -
Firstly - because the UK Chancellor has, in the opinion of most economic observers, been wildly optimistic in his forecasting of the crisis - we still have no clear idea of the depths of the recession before us.
Until there's some honesty in Government figures, how is anyone supposed to be able to plot a safe path through all of this?
Secondly - and more importantly, I feel - solutions need to be focussed more effectively than they have been by HMT. Which is where nationalists will find grounds for disagreement with unionists and vice versa.
Unionists (Obviously) want a UK recovery - in part because continued justification of the Union depends on it. Nationalists (And regionalists) fear that recovery in some areas may only be achieved at the expense of others.
Which is where the false dichotomy in your question comes in -
Allow me to paraphrase -
"Do the nationalists agree that even more borrowing [in Scotland] , with an even greater [current level of UK] national debt, is the answer?"
It could be, Yes.
Why? Because Scotland has a different economic and social base [Compared to other parts of the UK - i.e. South East England], a different recent economic history [Poor growth] compared to UK trends [Unsustainable growth] and a potentially different cost v revenue balance [e.g. renewables]
All of these are reasons why, in Scotland's case, investment holds more hope of shortening the recession than cost cutting.
These reasons don't apply across the UK and the same regenerative effects wouldn't necessarily be felt in other areas.
It boils down to this - the UK is not a valid economic unit. Economic circumstances in Scotland are different [In some instances better, in others worse] to those elsewhere in the UK. It makes sense, in the interest of Scotland's people, to treat her differently.
Unionists, of course, don't believe this. They would prefer a 'square peg v round hole' approach that would consign Scotland to decades of even poorer growth. That's partly because many Unionists don't seem to care what's in the best interests of Scotland's people.
Maybe the people, therefore, should look to someone who does?
Now, who would that be?
Complain about this comment
oldnat 191
Love the irony - guess you knew that your accusation of stereotyping in your 191 - is in fact itself stereotyping?
Reminds me of those on here who sometimes urge others to "deny them the oxygen of publicity" by ignoring opposing posters, but then -whoops- specifically REFER to the post/er that has caused their ire!
Also noticed your 191 criticised only style, yet nothing of the substance. An old, old oldnat ruse, but ya never know, it might just work....
Complain about this comment
#207 Expat
Who is this Dear Lord to whom you refer?
Lord Mandy?
Lord George?
Anyway - I'll answer your questions.
I realise the implications of all of the things to which you refer in you post #207.
However that is not the point.
The point I make is that the office, role and remit of the Scottish Minister for Finance, under the terms of the current constitutional settlement is not required to consider these. That is true regardlless of person or party in that office.
Again, I will ask - do you dispute that?
If so - perhaps you'll agree that the current constitutional settlement is not fit for purpose and the Scottish Government should be required to consider these implications to which you refer?
i.e. Full Fiscal Autonomy for the Scottish Government - at least!
Now - I answered your questions. Can you please answer mine?
Complain about this comment
#209 I feel I have to correct you regarding Alistair Darling's wildly optimistic forecasts for the recession, I don't believe Mr Darling is for one moment being wildly optimistic, I believe Mr Darling has been smoking something and is simply fantisizing.
Complain about this comment
Reluctant-Expat:
"Leaving aside the fact (and it is a fact, whether you like it or not) that London, Europe's richest region, is a net contributor to the UK Treasury, please can you share YOUR evidence for this long-dead nationalist claim?"
Despite London being heavily involved in the financial services that has cost the British taxpayers billions.
I am confident that their years of being a net contributor has been wiped out completely.
How pathetic.
What about Aberdeen, Shetlands and Orkney? These areas have p[rovided the London Government access to oil reserves worth hundreds of billions of pounds, and more is too be drilled.
Complain about this comment
#196 bluelaw & oldnat
Cheers for the sentiments!
I'm not bothered where the guy comes from - he's still our patron Saint and we should be allowed to celebrate that fact
After all - St Patrick wasn't entirely Irish either ;-)
I will be sinking a few after work today in celebration of today
Good Luck!
Complain about this comment
167. Chiefy1724
"The Sacred Lodestone of Forsyth's old seat in Stirling. If this goes it will be a UK Tory majority in the 110+ range"
Very goodway of putting it! Stirling holds huge psychological importance to Scot. Tories. (Murdo Fraser has described as you have, a 'weatherbell' for us)
172. Bandages_For_Konjic
I assume you havent read my full response? If you had you'd find me making the case that BSC was eventually profitable during the That years before eventual privatisation; and that this was the result of Tory economic theory- a success story.
But given your inability to read past the first line of a given contribution I woulnt have expected you to realise this fact.
165. northhighlander
I don't know about independence rising in support as a certainty; it might well do if D.C does something to reinforce old Scottish fears of a Tory government. But if he doesn't, maybe playing it with good political nuance, the effect could be very different. But yep, if he mucks up so to speak I'd expect voters to nowadays go Nat rather than Labour in opposition to Conservative government up here. (and I don't think we'll be in power for another 18 years, so the 'change' factor shouldnt resurface I wouldnt think)
Complain about this comment
Hi Anglophone,
Just a friendly enquiry; who exactly are the English?
My taught history is certainly incomplete, but I was taught that England was over-run by the Angles and the Saxons.
I've always been confused by what happened to the native English. Can you enlighten me here, please? Just to remove any suspicion, this is a genuine enquiry.
I think that the present thinking in Scotland is that you are welcome here if you have something to contribute no matter what your origins were.
Apparently the Normans had quite a presence in Scotland as well but they were here by invitation and never had as much of a divisive effect as in England. (Are you able to confirm that all communications between the House of Commons and the House of Lords have to be translated into Norman French and back again or has this practice been rescinded recently)?
Best wishes.
Complain about this comment
205. bighullabaloo
You paint a bleak picture, I'd hope as a young man Scotto-English relations as per a national level are better than that. (Besides its the relation of the political class that really effects [and affects] such issues as anglo-scot relationships; rightly or wrongly- see the act of union to reinforce that one)
Complain about this comment
#207 Reluctant-Expat -
"Do you not realise that we pay a share of all borrowing?"
I can't use it here - but my immediate reaction to that was a rather rude expression that combines the vernacular for excreta with the name of Sir Arthur Conan-Doyle's most famous creation.
There's also a legitimate extension to your rhetorical (At least, I assume it's rhetorical) question -
"Do you not realise that we pay a share of all borrowing and have been for since time immemorial?"
Borrowing that's been spent on inflating an unsustainable growth bubble outside Scotland. [Where growth, typically, has been relatively poor]
Borrowing against revenues generated, in significant proportion, by oil extracted from Scottish geographically territorial waters.
Borrowing, that's been propping up the Union for years with little net benefit to Scotland - the so-called Union Dividend.
Yes, we've noticed this.
Riddle me this, instead - why should we continue to fund unsustainable UK borrowing that has been shown to have little net benefit to the people of Scotland when instead, we can borrow against our own revenues, to fund our own investment, to grow our own economy, to benefit our own people - rather than propping up UK Plc's house of cards? (With Darling as the joker)
Borrowing's going up anyway - much more than Darling dares admit - why not direct it towards the future good of the Scottish people?
Complain about this comment
Just for the record:
I have complained about a comment from Reluctant-Expat. The comment contained the term 'twisted nationalist mindset'.
The term itself is not top of the league for insults but was indicative of the type of comments this individual was posting.
We all have a bit of a dig at one another from time to time. I stated that I didn't take deanthetory seriously yesterday, he responded more or less in kind - fair enough.
However, when one posts comments containing insults and name calling with the frequency that 'expat' does then the mods should act.
I admire the restraint that the rest of you people have shown with this person.
Complain about this comment
Anglophone,
As it is your patron saint's day, I would like to take this opportunity to partially repay an English friend who gave a truly superb speech about Scotland at a St Andrew's Day bash last year.
Following the same vein as his speech, I would like to salute the land who gave the world Shakespeare, Dickens, Orwell, Wells, Fleming, Austen, Christie, Hitchcock, Yeats, Chaplin, Newton, Faraday, Darwin, Pilkington, Hawking, Turing, Keynes, Whittle, Stephenson, John Harrison, Cockerell, Noble, Henry Gray, Berners-Lee, Stephenson, the other Stephenson, Brunel, Sellers (damn, that man was a star), C. Clarke, Beatrix Potter, Carroll, Rowling, Pratchett, Byron, Bronte, Coward, Pepys, Eliot, the other Eliot, Wallis, Lawrence, Priestley, Tolkien, Wordsworth, Lewis, Baylis and also the jet engine, turbojet engine, gas turbine, the first VTOL aircraft, the first jet airliner, the only supersonic airliner, the screw propeller, steam train, the overground railway, the underground railway, tarmac, the computer, the pocket calculator, the world wide web, the typewriter, teletext services, the SMS, the LED, the microphone, stereo sound, the postage stamp, the home of the Industrial Revolution, the microchip, the electric battery, electric engine, electromagnetic generator, the transformer, the diesel compression engine, the first computer game, the first digital audio player, the Periodic Table, the first police force and where protons, neutrons, electrons plus more than a few planets, spiral galaxies, pulsars, comets, sunspots and that DNA gunk were discovered. Also where the end of Smallpox was developed.*
Good on yer, sir. Pour yourself a pint of London Pride, serve yourself a full English and enjoy some cricket.
*I got this list from Wiki so excuse any errors!
(I did bump into every single nationalist while I was trawling Wiki's pages. What are the odds on that?)
Complain about this comment
So the wheels have come off the Labour limousine and there has been a dreadful crash, fatal to.
Gordon certainly put the foot down, but the vehicle was second hand, a flash, suped up, customised job they acquired from those Tory Boys.
Should never have been persuaded by the spivs that it was the one for them, a more traditional and stable model would have suited better.
Complain about this comment
#205 Bighullabaloo
Let us assume the F.T. is correct with their accussations, then why would four fifths (80%) of the population be entitled to claim 85p from every pound allocated via the Barnett Formula fund.
The Barnett Formula was not put into practice for the Channel Tunnel, as it was deemed beneficial to all of the U.K. The good people of Banff would rightly disagree, they have yet to see a French tourist.
The Olympic Games was deemed the same, beneficial to all of the U.K. Regenerating London's east end to the tune of 10 -12 billion will benefit everyone, can you see Macduff becoming the new Riviera through the Olympics?
Happy St George's Day.
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
#217 deanthetory
I didn't paint the "bleak" picture. It's a direct quote from the FT. So it's their bleak picture, not mine.
All I did was express amazement at the utter selfishness of people moaning about five minutes worth of what they've been doling out to other people for literally hundreds of years.
The most ironic part is that two jokers who would regard themselves as cheerleaders for the UK are turning out to be the best argument for Scottish independence ever. Maybe justice exists after all.
Complain about this comment
219. greenockboy
I lend support to your sentiments; I don't want Brians blog to turn into NR's!
I was rather hoping that most Anglo-Cons (read S. coast, England) wouldn't stay but go back to NR's (as I find myself constantly having to act as apologist to the comments of the English Conservative Party rank and file; but then thats the Scottish Tories oldest quandry isnt it?)
Complain about this comment
193 Bobbishop
Damn, once again I've been smoked out. I sit here, when the doctors let me, my blood pressure 190/150, trying to disguise my impotent rage as I pen my hate filled diatribes. Much more of this and they'll be putting the electrodes back on again for one of the old-fashioned 20,000 volt sabbaticals.
If you read back, you'll find that I have several styles of contribution. Serious pieces that pose serious questions...these are usually filed under "too-hard" and elicit no response. Rebuttal pieces where I feel that people are peddling ridiculous untruths and, finally, shameless lampoons that attract all sorts of responses and make me feel wanted.
Why do any of us do this? It's not as if I'm being paid...other than my monthly stipend from MI5 of course. Mostly I enjoy the argument and like playing with words. It's a simple as that. I've just checked the BP at 120/80 which is pretty good at my advancing years so I can't be taking any of this too much to heart.
To be honest, these arguments have been looping the loop for months...years even and we're no nearer to any conclusion...but you asked for a serious take on the future of the UK and here it is.
The UK (you'll hate this) is actually a very successful model. It has been in existence for 300 years and arrived at being fully fledged liberal democracy, possibly first but certainly no later than anyone else, without the need for sanguinary revolution. That in my mind does not do away with the need for some constitutional reform (Labour have completely messed up the House of Lords reform, seemingly replacing the anachronistic but basically duty-bound hereditaries with a bunch of mildly corrupt placemen) and I generally approve of the way in which aspects of the constitutional system are being modernised.
The UK has a perfectly promising future. I am completely relaxed about the fact that we can now only blow up the planet once over or the fact that as a nation we have been overtaken in GDP by China and, no doubt India too soon. Why I should feel a sense of emasculating decline because a country with 20 times my population has become, in some abstract way, richer has always eluded me? Provided that we concentrate on good education and good basic engineering/commercial skills there is no reason to suppose that we cannot keep our peoples in a good standard of living for the forseable future.
The UK's foreign policy position with regard to Europe is probably about right. We remain, and should remain, a well integrated member of the European Union. This will be essential to our economic prosperity. We rightly remain cautious about the federal initiatives of some member states, quite probably more in tune with sentiments of most European citizens than you may think. Should the Euro make it through the current recession unscathed (i.e. countries such as Greece, Portugal, Italy and even Ireland are not forced out by macro-economic instability) then I think that the UK should join.
I doubt that the argument over the level of national devolution within the UK will ever be resolved. The current model is a good start and I welcome the devolution of a range of powers provided that the iniquitous West Lothian question can be properly resolved. I genuinely believe that full independence for Scotland, or indeed Wales, would be a big mistake...looking at it dispassionately I see real economic risk in exchange for rather intangible gains as far as ordinary people are concerned. It is a single issue argument concealing a broad church of interests, most worryingly, a type of isolationist Sinn Fein equivalent which probably be precisely the opposite to what is needed in the modern world.
The UK faces a big energy security problem and you'll miss it when its gone. Happily, from being an island of coal surrounded by cod, via world class and rather unexpected oil reserves, we sit on some of the best renewables potential in the world. The UK could be largely energy independent if we can get the real political will behind it...rather than ambitious slogans. This may yet provide a crucial competitive advantage in an energy hungry and resource depleting world. Tough political choices required here.
The greatest problem facing UK society in my view is polarisation of wealth. Worryingly we may passed the acme of social cohesiveness in this country, without some form of redistribution that actually works beyond giving anyone who earns more than £50,000 a good kicking. But the issue in my view is not so much poverty (just back from India so these labels can sometimes seem a little trite) but poverty of ambition. We have become suckers for feelgood self-realisation slogans whilst the ability of individuals to better themselves is being progressively eroded via political constraint, standardisation and a system that has decided that it wishes to celebrate mediocrity above all else. Similarly, political disengagement offers the real risk of creating a new self-perpetuating political elite. It will be truly ironic if, just 70 odd years after achieving full suffrage we simply hand back power to a "new aristocracy".
However, to quote Andrew Marr...."in spite of everything, at the beginning of the 21st Century, to have been born British remains, in global terms, an extraordinary stroke of luck!"
Serious piece over...that's basically where I stand...oh yes...why not let the Old Firm play in Nationwide league and let themselves play their way into the Premiership;-)
I've really got to get on now so please don't think that I'm being rude if I don't reply.
Complain about this comment
#203 Anglophone
Hey there Anglophone ;-)
(Are you coping with posters on here liking you!)
"I'm slightly surprised because usually when oil prices are low, regardless of what's happening in the rest of the country, there are tumbleweeds blowing up and down Union Street."
Anglophone - naughty! You know the area has its "own economy" effect, where house prices, wages etc. are known to buck the national and UK trends. You make a joke - it's pretty funny. Except it would be tumbleweeds and bendy and ordinary buses - that's Union Street ;-)
On oil, I know Aberdeen is, and has been, at the forefront of this new extraction technology. I know a lot of wells have remained viable long after they were meant to. Mr A_W is busy because there is therefore such a demand for integrity management. That's not a dig - sorry.
The figures. Well, if it's not a conspiracy (not the best word!), there are too many "whys". It's an argument for another day, when I've more energy, ha. Converse to your anti over-suspicion, remember aswell, it is easy to find "rational reasons" for everything. Another day...
"Regardless of parochial oneupmanship, the need for a solid base of renewables is pressing (and nuclear too...I'm not a zealot)"
Panics as he realises he might have given the impression he's a hippy! "Nae danger" Anglophone ;-)
Scotland doesn't need nuclear. We discussed it on a previous thread, and I shoved the bulk of the points onto quirkynats (google - it's a freeforum I helped establish - I threw the kids some food first ;-).
" there may have been some breathless declarations on leading the way into a brave new world. I'd give it a few years to check the veracity of that one."
Well, they have to run parallel with what we've got of course, to run out the troubles...(I'd rather ask than tell....!)
I agree with your last point ;-)
Did you never think of going into politics? (waits to see ;-)
Complain about this comment
#222 Wansanshoo
"can you see Macduff becoming the new Riviera through the Olympics?"
Not through the London Olympics, no.
However I'm still pinning my hopes on the BBC's much promised (but as yet elusive) global warming.
If (and it's a big "if") that ever arrives then Macduff may at long last have its day in the sun (literally).
Complain about this comment
Brian - re update: a cut, is a cut, is a cut and given Scotland was given the lowest pocket money settlement after May 2007 since devolution (itself a cut) - your Unionist slip is showing.
PS: it seems your pal Prof Calman has been looking at the SNP's National Conversation site for ideas for his committee to come up with, after the other day's 'press release from Labour in Scotland'.
Complain about this comment
#177 Reluctant-Expat
"Leaving aside the fact (and it is a fact, whether you like it or not) that London, Europe's richest region, is a net contributor to the UK Treasury"
And what's your source or evidence for that fact, R-E?
As you well know from our previous exchanges on accounts, estimates and statistics, the UK Treasury doesn't 'do' independently audited accounts, so if you really have any new evidence I'm sure we'd all love to know it. Even if there is such evidence, the regional detail is not public. This is no real surprise because, in practice, the regional GDP or GVA added by any enterprise with employees in more than one [aptly named] NUTS region is moot.
If you know of a better source, please quote it, but the leastworst estimates of which I'm aware come from the Office for National Statistics' Blue Book which ONS themselves claim are "detailed estimates of national product, income and expenditure for the UK". They are not regionalised. However, ONS also produce what they misleadingly call Regional Accounts whence, I suspect, your fact claims derive. That these are not facts is amply demonstrated by their Summary Quality Report for Regional Gross Value Added Releases, a PDF available from ONS' Quality reports for economic statistics.
Four sentences on page 2 of the PDF tell us all we need to know about their factual nature:
Or in English: They're estimates of estimates.
Or in English: We did check they add up.
Or in English: They really are estimates.
As a "techie" rather than a wordsmith, I'm not entirely sure what this means and would welcome suggestions. I suspect it means: You can't often prove us wrong.
ONS have staff in three locations, two of them South of the M4 and the other just moved to leafy Islington from smoky Pimlico. Who'd care to place bets on where the regional modelling decisions are taken?
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
220 OldNat
That's very kind. I will try to respond from memory alone by saluting the country that bought us.
Anaesthetics, antiseptics, modern geology, modern philosophy, road surfacing, the modern bicycle, the rotary steam engine, the telephone, antibiotics (bit of a stretch if you know the story), the television, cloning, the waterproof coat, and of course the Sensational Alex Harvey Band. The brain turns to mush when you try to remember these things so I'm sure that I have missed many out.
A UN report a few years ago stated that of the 100 most significant inventions of the 20th Century, 46 had been invented in Britain. Not bad.
Complain about this comment
#216 bob
I don't actually think that there are any 'true' English people left?
England has been constantly invaded and occupied by various tribes/nations over history. The Kings & Queens of old invariably married into foreign families either to truck favour or to end ill-will between noble houses
I'm sure that a very long time ago you could have found a 'true' Englishman but I do seem to recall watching a programme on (Discovery I think?) that said that the original bloodlines are extinct now and have been mixed for many generations now
So I guess we are a nation of people from many different origins with a common language (that we recognise as English today)
To be honest I see being English as where I was born - I was born in England so that's what I am - for better or worse!!
Complain about this comment
Wansanshoo, a few of us are still waiting for your source for "114%" and what you think it is "114%" of?
And how you equate it to London being both a net contributor to the Treasury and to it being the richest region in both the UK and Europe.
I'm guessing you read it somewhere and, even though you didn't really understand what it meant, have decided to repeat it again and again hoping it will stick somewhere else even though you can't explain it properly.
I'm right, aren't I? I think I am.
Clearly just another nationalist who wants independence at any cost (prob since he watched a certain film) and is scrambling around the web trying to find some grown-up justification.
"Freeeedom!!!"
Complain about this comment
229 Brownedov
"Leaving aside the fact (and it is a fact, whether you like it or not) that London, Europe's richest region, is a net contributor to the UK Treasury"
And what's your source or evidence for that fact, R-E?""
It's probably just based on tax returns declared wealth in bank accounts that have a name rather than a number ;-)
Sorry...to good to pass up.
Complain about this comment
#197 greenockboy
"Where are the Scottish Unionist modernists and reformists? A wind is blowing, bend or break !!"
Where indeed? Although to be fair, dean occasionally shows flashes of common sense, and it is just conceivable that Cameron would be prepared to modernise once he gets the keys to No.10. Boom or bust seems to be the definitive NuLab policy, though.
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
Old Nat
Your previous comment on the tax rise 0f 50% stated that those earning over 150,000 would get around it by making tax-free pension contributions. I believe the chancellor has also tightened that up and this privilege will be stopped for the above earners.
Complain about this comment
#229 Brownedov
"Therefore, the reliability of the estimates is often used as proxy for their accuracy, as measured by the extent of revisions to the estimates."
As a "wordsmith" rather than a "techie" allow me to translate: "The pellet with the poison's in the flagon with the dragon. The vessel with the pestle has the brew that is true!"
That should do it. ;-)
Complain about this comment
#215 deanthetoryboy -
"I assume you haven't read my full response?"
You assume wrongly. Maybe you should assume less. (Just a suggestion)
Now, you seem to be deliberately confusing the Scottish and British Steel industries. Which, perhaps, shouldn't be surprising coming from a Unionist.
The revival of the steel industry you're trumpeting happened, for the most part, outside of Scotland partly because (See #136 above on the stripping of plant out of Gartcosh and transporting it to South Wales) of a reduction in competition engineered by manipulating Scottish works off the map.
Anway, you, in your #157 -
"I beg to suggest that the [Scottish] Steel industry was not a 'perfectly viable industry' under public ownership."
- chose to draw the usual, Tory, causal link between 'public ownership' and 'viability' - i.e. public ownership equals unviable vs private ownership equals viable.
As I pointed out, this completely missed the point of northhighlander's #153.
There were factors which made Scottish Steel viable - skills base, transport links, geographic advantages etc - that pre-figure ownership. Ownership increases or decreases these in a business sense but it doesn't negate them, in and of itself.
The Rootes plant at Linwood, for example, was hampered almost from inception by factors like distance from its sister plant in Coventry (A geographic factor that resulted directly from the unloved Industrial Development Certificates - another winning Tory economic policy)
Under public or private ownership - these factors remain.
Scottish Steels pre-existing viability as a business was driven down, deliberately in my view, by the Tory government.
Had it been managed more sympathetically whilst in public ownership - it might still have prospered (It didn't, for example, become 'unviable' on the day of nationalisation - it took Tory machinations to do that.
And had it, as northhighlander also pointed out, remained in private ownership it would likely have prospered - Tory economic policy or not Tory economic policy - because it was a sound business that delivered a good product.
Complain about this comment
#232 mightychewster
I don't know if there are many true English people left or not. However having lived and worked in the South east from 1978-2002 I think there are plenty who believe in the thatcherite statement "There is no such thing as society". I certainly found a very different culture down there and just being back in Glasgow I find there is much more of a social conscious.
Complain about this comment
Hi mightychewster,
Thanks for the reply.
I wish you great joy and pride in your country of birth. We have no choice in the matter and we make such a fuss about it, don't we.
Let's hope that the politics sort themselves out soon and we can get back to just being friends.
Best wishes.
Complain about this comment
238. Bandages_For_Konjic
My argument pointed out that BSC (my example) was profitable, productive for a brief time under public ownership (the turnaround 1981/1-1986/7) as a path towards final privatisation, whence it became very sucessfull.
I said nothing about directly contradicting his statements anyways; my contextual outline serves to reinforce his original contention that private promotes sustainablility better. Whether you thought I was contradicting his point or not is your own reading between line that were never written; not once did I say anything like ;you've got it wrong' or 'to offer another view', all I said was to offer up my opinion on the matter, and if it supported his contention then good, if not then fair enough. I referenced his statement as to serve as a context to the discourse I was engaged in.
Can I take it that you read between lines that aren't there simply because you read -tory- and get a kind of suspicion about intent, or desire to 'prove me wrong' even if your missing the context of the discussion?
Complain about this comment
223 bighullaballoo wrote
"The most ironic part is that two jokers who would regard themselves as cheerleaders for the UK are turning out to be the best argument for Scottish independence ever. Maybe justice exists after all."
Just to clarify bh, are you talking about Anglophone and Reluctant-Expat or Brown and Darling here?
Complain about this comment
As John Rentoul has pointed out in The Indy today - CMD and Wee Georgie have to do precisely nothng to knock down Broon and Darling's house of cards. All they have to do is sit tight and wait for the electorate to deliver the keys to nos. 10, 11 and 12 Downing Street on a plate.
However, someone, somewhere, sometime soon'ish is going to have to start thinking about where the axe is going to fall in terms of public sector spending cuts.
This report from the right-wing sounding board Reform possibly gives us an idea of where Tory thinking might be heading. It makes interesting reading.
Complain about this comment
#239 ricky,
Please don't confuse the SE England with the rest of us! It's a different world down there. I work all over and have also had the misfortune to have been based there for a while. There is a certain bubble that covers certain areas (London and the SE being the main ones)
When i'm home I live up north in the NW (Cumbrian/Lancastrian border) and there is a feeling of isolation from the rest of England. Much the same as you guys we feel neglected and ignored - I think the same attitude can be found in the NE and Tyneside and borders
It seems the further you live from London the less your opinion matters!
#240 bob - agree completely with your sentiments; we do tend to make too much of where we are born don't we?!?
Anyway chaps, am going to take myself off to the pub where I shall raise a glass to St George - and then I may raise one or two extra ones as well, for all our countries of birth! Could end up being a late one mind :-)
Complain about this comment
#242 GrassyKnollington
It's one of those wonderfully happy coincidences where you can insert whichever pair of jokers you like and it still works.
Complain about this comment
In an earlier post I commented on the implausable precision of the Governments Deficit figures £703 Billion (how does the 3 get there).
This sum is however predicated on an immediate and strong return of ecomomic growth. Informed comment in todays media is sceptical.
So, could an even larger deficit be managed? Will the markets take fright and a Latin American style of collapse develop? And what of the poor old Tories, what are they going to do, that is, if there are any choices left for them?
Complain about this comment
#234 Anglophone
"It's probably just based on tax returns declared wealth in bank accounts that have a name rather than a number"
I'm a fan of Swiss democracy, not their old numbered bank accounts, so I have no problem with that. If you look at some of my earliest postings, you will see me moaning that 3rd world aid without effective good governance caveats puts smiles mainly on the car dealerships around Lake Geneva. It is changing, though, as compliance with EU banking directives has been agreed and put into practice prior to Schengen taking effect on the frontiers.
Had R-E's point been about the wealth concentrated in the NUTS London region I would not have quibbled.
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
233 Reluctant Ex Pat.
There you go again, jumping in head first, if you'd taken the time to check the board you may have come across my reply. You got to relax more.
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
Well, it's been a fun day all, a welcome break from the monotony that is my in-tray.
It's beautifully sunny in the part of the world I currently occupy (and I thought this travelling lark was behind me!) so I'm going to blitz through the last of this work, hit one of the local beach bars and raise a pint of something approaching real ale in a nod to our neighbours. I actually have an urge to indulge in something involving sausage, bacon, eggs, mushrooms, beans and a few rounds of toast too. There is surely a pub around here somewhere....
Nationalists will have us believe the English are a mortal enemy, working all out to destroy our beloved Alba with only greed and world domination in their cold, dark and otherwise empty hearts.
I still see no sign of this.
In fact, the only enemies that we can all agree on are the politicians. Unfortunately, every politician mentioned so far is Scottish....which makes me shudder a little.
Complain about this comment
#237 bighullabaloo
As a "wordsmith" rather than a "techie" allow me to translate: "The pellet with the poison's in the flagon with the dragon. The vessel with the pestle has the brew that is true!"
Thanks - much as I thought.
Complain about this comment
#210 regmitchell
Glad you noticed the irony.
The content didn't really require any comment.
Complain about this comment
Reluctant Ex Pat 249
'' Every politician mentioned so far is Scottish.......which makes me shudder a little''
Quiz Time: Which part of Scotland was Alistair Darling born?
I assume you still cant find my previous reply which you accused me of not displaying ?
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
249. At 3:36pm on 23 Apr 2009, Reluctant-Expat wrote:
Nationalists will have us believe the English are a mortal enemy, working all out to destroy our beloved Alba with only greed and world domination in their cold, dark and otherwise empty hearts.
Rubbish! I have lived in Scotland for 20 years, hailing originally from Yorkshire. I heve never heard anyone, Nationalist or not, express such a popint of view. I'd happily vote for an Independent Scotland - what is your problem? If you are a Scot, you display a contempt of your own people's abiliities I find incomprehensible.
Complain about this comment
It's got very friendly on here this last half hour. What's going on?
Has this budget revived the Dunkirk spirit?
Note to Expat.....
"In fact, the only enemies that we can all agree on are the politicians. Unfortunately, every politician mentioned so far is Scottish....which makes me shudder a little."
Correction. Brown and Darling are not Scots!
They are North British!
Complain about this comment
Reluctant-Expat.
Can you tell us where you are. I fear a lot of us will be looking to flee as the Great Insolvency develops and expands.
Complain about this comment
#231 Anglophone
For once, RE wrote what I could also have said. He and I may like England for totally different reasons, but on that single fact we are in agreement.
It was his list, not mine, and your appreciation is due to him not me.
Complain about this comment
#232 mightychewster
You are English because you feel that you are English. That's no bad thing. Those folk on any side of any border who try to define themselves by any bloodline nonsense are the real danger.
We are all mongrel nations - just as well, inbreeding is a bad thing!
Nationality is an intellectual and emotional construct of the human brain - not some pseudo scientific genetic nonsense.
Complain about this comment
#236 rickyross3359
You may well be right. I'm not an accountant, but those with that kind of money have accountants, and I imagine that they are already working out other ways to avoid paying 50% (or even 40%) on much of their income.
Complain about this comment
#236 ricky, #258 oldnat: As per my #148, see The big hole in the 2009 Budget for one way for the super-rich to minimise their tax bill.
Complain about this comment
oldnat 251
So why bother to post?
R.E. 220
and Reg J. Mitchell !
Complain about this comment
#253
Well said.
As R B Cunningham Graham said
"Our enemy is not the English.......... Our enemy is the Scot born among us without imagination"
Or as the Proclaimers sing
"All through the story the immigrants came,
the gael and the pict, the angle and the dane,
from Pakistan, England and from the Ukraine,
they're all Scotland's story and they're all worth the same,
Complain about this comment
#253
Might it be possible for a day to pass without RE rabbiting on about caricatures of nationalists who don't actually exist.
He's maybe been away too long but this line of attack on nationalists dried up at least 20 years ago.
I'm afraid the contribution of most unionists to these topics are so banal and juvenile that they actually enhance the independence argument.
It is perferctly legitimate to support the retention of the union. For many it is an understandable emotional attachment. For others it is an "in the balance"sort of dilemma.
It would be useful however if some serious points in support of that position were put then we might have a real debate
For people like myself independence is the normal, logical and most efficient way of a community to rule itself. I don't think there is any telling argument against normal independence and growing numbers of Scots are realising that Scotland's present position is, simply, not normal.
There is no economic case that prevails for or against independence. Everybody can be independent. Your condition in any future will be decided by how well you manage with what you've got.
Arguments for the union presently widely in use demean all who deploy them. They quite simply say that Scotland is receiving handouts from England and should settle for that. Laying aside the fact that for the last fifty years at least the opposite has been the case "Scotland, the beggar nation" is hardly a claim that would suggest the Union has been good for a small country in receipt of natural resources much of the world would cut off their right arm to have.
I have always been aware of the "Half-wit factor" in politics. George Bush got in in one. "You can full some of the people all of the time,and those are the ones you should concentrate on"
To be blunt virtually all the unionist contribution to these debates would suggest they have taken that sentiment on board.
I for one would be happy if they could raise their game and we could have a real debate.
Complain about this comment
Brian:
Stop the press - we're in recession....Not a stop the press alert, it should have been a "NEWS ALERT"....Tagline....
~Dennis Junior~
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS