Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 5
Discussion
Wow, I find this even more sinister:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-...
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-...
herald said:
SNP leader Alex Salmond has urged people to steer clear of unionist rallies after Better Together accused the Yes campaign of turning "sinister".
Labour MP Jim Murphy was pelted with eggs and said he has been threatened with violence during his 100 Towns in 100 Days tour.
Today, Mr Murphy accepted that Mr Salmond has not personally orchestrated the attacks, but the SNP leader has spoken out to urge Yes supporters to ignore the unionists in future.
"I condemn any egg throwing or any intimidation from any side," Mr Salmond told Sky News' Murnaghan show.
"Somebody was convicted, of course, of online threats against me. Somebody thought his car should be a political weapon. There was a woman, a Yes campaigner, assaulted on the streets of Glasgow.
"I don't hold press conferences accusing Mr Murphy of orchestrating these events, because I know that would be ridiculous to do so.
"So let me be absolutely clear to people watching, if Mr Murphy comes balling and shouting in a street corner near you any time soon keep doing your shopping, keep doing what you were doing.
"He's just like the guy with The End Is Nigh round his neck - he'll go away soon."
Ukip has offered to join Mr Murphy's "wishy washy" tour to "make sure he stays safe" when it comes to Scotland for a pro-Union rally in two weeks.
Mr Salmond urged campaigners to steer clear of Ukip and its leader Nigel Farage, who had to be evacuated from a pub in a police riot van after Radical Independence and anti-Ukip protesters barricaded him inside during a previous visit to Scotland in May 2013.
Mr Salmond said: "If Mr Farage comes in a blaze of publicity in the next few days, as he says he's going to do, ignore him, he will go back to Clacton very soon."
Mr Murphy told Murnaghan: "I don't mind heckles and, d'you know what, I don't even mind people throwing eggs - that's just a dry cleaning bill.
"But what happened after the first televised debate between Alistair Darling and Alex Salmond is that things took a sinister turn.
"Instead of turning up in crowds of people on all sides there was an organised mob of Yes supporters, facilitated through Yes Scotland and local organisations through websites, Facebook and other social media."
The mobs turned over tables, climed on crates and tried "to attack a photographer because they happened to be English", according to Mr Murphy who said he has been called "a traitor, a quisling, a terrorist and much else that I can't say" and challenged to several street fights.
"I'm not suggesting Mr Salmond has orchestrated this, of course I'm not, but Yes Scotland at a local level have made that happen," he said.
Mr Salmond said Mr Murphy was being "absolutely and utterly ridiculous" and urged people to visit a blog by an Aberdeenshire journalism graduate to see "exactly see what Mr Murphy has been up to".
The Still Raining, Still Dreaming blog said No voters shouted, pointed fingers and threatened to take Yes signs off nationalists at a Better Together rally in Stonehaven.
Mr Murphy looked on and denied that both sides of the campaign had intimidating supporters, the blog said.
In other words, he is not saying behave yourself, he is saying don't even listen to what the other side. Job done for the Ministry of Public Enlightenment and its 'blueshirts'.Labour MP Jim Murphy was pelted with eggs and said he has been threatened with violence during his 100 Towns in 100 Days tour.
Today, Mr Murphy accepted that Mr Salmond has not personally orchestrated the attacks, but the SNP leader has spoken out to urge Yes supporters to ignore the unionists in future.
"I condemn any egg throwing or any intimidation from any side," Mr Salmond told Sky News' Murnaghan show.
"Somebody was convicted, of course, of online threats against me. Somebody thought his car should be a political weapon. There was a woman, a Yes campaigner, assaulted on the streets of Glasgow.
"I don't hold press conferences accusing Mr Murphy of orchestrating these events, because I know that would be ridiculous to do so.
"So let me be absolutely clear to people watching, if Mr Murphy comes balling and shouting in a street corner near you any time soon keep doing your shopping, keep doing what you were doing.
"He's just like the guy with The End Is Nigh round his neck - he'll go away soon."
Ukip has offered to join Mr Murphy's "wishy washy" tour to "make sure he stays safe" when it comes to Scotland for a pro-Union rally in two weeks.
Mr Salmond urged campaigners to steer clear of Ukip and its leader Nigel Farage, who had to be evacuated from a pub in a police riot van after Radical Independence and anti-Ukip protesters barricaded him inside during a previous visit to Scotland in May 2013.
Mr Salmond said: "If Mr Farage comes in a blaze of publicity in the next few days, as he says he's going to do, ignore him, he will go back to Clacton very soon."
Mr Murphy told Murnaghan: "I don't mind heckles and, d'you know what, I don't even mind people throwing eggs - that's just a dry cleaning bill.
"But what happened after the first televised debate between Alistair Darling and Alex Salmond is that things took a sinister turn.
"Instead of turning up in crowds of people on all sides there was an organised mob of Yes supporters, facilitated through Yes Scotland and local organisations through websites, Facebook and other social media."
The mobs turned over tables, climed on crates and tried "to attack a photographer because they happened to be English", according to Mr Murphy who said he has been called "a traitor, a quisling, a terrorist and much else that I can't say" and challenged to several street fights.
"I'm not suggesting Mr Salmond has orchestrated this, of course I'm not, but Yes Scotland at a local level have made that happen," he said.
Mr Salmond said Mr Murphy was being "absolutely and utterly ridiculous" and urged people to visit a blog by an Aberdeenshire journalism graduate to see "exactly see what Mr Murphy has been up to".
The Still Raining, Still Dreaming blog said No voters shouted, pointed fingers and threatened to take Yes signs off nationalists at a Better Together rally in Stonehaven.
Mr Murphy looked on and denied that both sides of the campaign had intimidating supporters, the blog said.
Welshbeef said:
NoNeed said:
Welshbeef said:
NoNeed said:
Except it isn't a Tory policy it's an EU policy and what quite a few people do not realise is that if we deny a big German health company access to our market they are able to sue us.
This is an old report but explains it better. The EU will privatise the NHS and the SNP wants into the EU.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/...
Burger Fluffnick PVC driver XJS driver black swan Vincter prince bent over - care to share your thoughts on this and why Scotland wants to move towards this policy?This is an old report but explains it better. The EU will privatise the NHS and the SNP wants into the EU.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/...
Yep its good we have a good defence service.
mybrainhurts said:
Welshbeef said:
NoNeed said:
Welshbeef said:
NoNeed said:
Except it isn't a Tory policy it's an EU policy and what quite a few people do not realise is that if we deny a big German health company access to our market they are able to sue us.
This is an old report but explains it better. The EU will privatise the NHS and the SNP wants into the EU.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/...
Burger Fluffnick PVC driver XJS driver black swan Vincter prince bent over - care to share your thoughts on this and why Scotland wants to move towards this policy?This is an old report but explains it better. The EU will privatise the NHS and the SNP wants into the EU.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/...
Yep its good we have a good defence service.
'Business for Scotland’ has played a vocal role in the Yes campaign, despite its members’ limited contribution to the country’s economy
So members of 'Business for Scotland' are essentially people who make very little money and employ relatively few Scots. Pointed out on here several times before no doubt.
So members of 'Business for Scotland' are essentially people who make very little money and employ relatively few Scots. Pointed out on here several times before no doubt.
Another gem.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-...
If there is a Yes, how annoyed are the Yes supporters going to be when they find out the currency plan B is totally rubbish, and that independence without currency union would be a disaster, and hence with no CU from westminster, independence will be a disaster so we better not do it.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-...
If there is a Yes, how annoyed are the Yes supporters going to be when they find out the currency plan B is totally rubbish, and that independence without currency union would be a disaster, and hence with no CU from westminster, independence will be a disaster so we better not do it.
BlackLabel said:
'Business for Scotland’ has played a vocal role in the Yes campaign, despite its members’ limited contribution to the country’s economy
So members of 'Business for Scotland' are essentially people who make very little money and employ relatively few Scots. Pointed out on here several times before no doubt.
Wow blacklabel, that is most damning dissection of BfS I've seen yet. Talk about sham.So members of 'Business for Scotland' are essentially people who make very little money and employ relatively few Scots. Pointed out on here several times before no doubt.
newspaper said:
The Yes side’s 200, not all of whom are declared members of BfS, include just three identified as active directors of public limited companies. The vast majority are small businesspeople such as guesthouse and shopkeepers, or sole traders such as consultants, designers and accountants.
Related Articles
--
Even more interestingly, a number of the leading BfS members – like the Yes effort generally – appear to have done quite well out of the Scottish public purse. BfS has seven directors, of whom four have substantial businesses. Three of the four – an unusually high proportion – have recently received substantial public support or subsidy for their businesses from the Scottish taxpayer.
Tony Banks, sole director of the largest BfS member business, Balhousie Care, a care home chain, is a beneficiary of the SNP government’s introduction of free personal care for the elderly. Public funding for this and other care services supported two-thirds of Balhousie’s clients in 2011, according to the company, a proportion that is likely to have grown since.
Ian McDougall is the director of the Glasgow Distillery Company, which was awarded £130,000 in regional selective assistance earlier this year by Scottish Enterprise. He also runs another business that helps others to get public grants.
Perhaps most interesting is Ivan McKee, whose company, Greenfold Systems, has twice hosted the First Minister, Alex Salmond, for SNP or pro-independence business events. Mr McKee has been a prominent spokesman for BfS – using Greenfold, a contract manufacturer and fabricator, as an example of how Scottish independence can work for business.
In December 2012, a few months after BfS was created, Greenfold was awarded £400,000 in regional selective assistance by Scottish Enterprise. The grant was given to create 65 new jobs at Greenfold’s Dunfermline factory, where it then employed 84 people, according to media reports.
However, almost two years on, few of these new jobs have been created. According to a feature on the company in the June 2014 edition of Fife Business Matters magazine, Greenfold still employs only 90 people. The latest accounts, for the year to September 30 2013, say that it is a “small company” with tangible net assets of only £135,000. Greenfold is registered in England and several contracts mentioned on Greenfold’s website appear to have been at least partly fulfilled by its sister companies in England.
The criteria for regional selective assistance state that any projects funded by it “must involve an element of capital investment” and be “mainly funded from the private sector”. Greenfold’s accounts for the period since the grant was awarded do not appear to show any significant capital investment or private funding on the company’s part.
--
But it is clearly not representative of Scottish businesspeople, the majority of whom will be voting No. Whether or not they are comfortable saying so is another matter, amid persistent reports – denied by the Scottish Government – that businesses have been threatened with losing contracts if they speak out. As with the abuse of civil service resources, described by The Telegraph last week, it is another example of how the Scottish official machine may be being bent to support independence.
“That’s why I got involved in the debate in the first place, I was so outraged that people were believing business supported the Yes campaign,” says Mr Hague, whose own business employs 200 people in West Lothian and does the vast majority of its trade across the border.
“The success with which the SNP managed to silence the CBI in this debate is stunning. They’ve silenced the voice of business and created their own artificial voice of business.”
Related Articles
--
Even more interestingly, a number of the leading BfS members – like the Yes effort generally – appear to have done quite well out of the Scottish public purse. BfS has seven directors, of whom four have substantial businesses. Three of the four – an unusually high proportion – have recently received substantial public support or subsidy for their businesses from the Scottish taxpayer.
Tony Banks, sole director of the largest BfS member business, Balhousie Care, a care home chain, is a beneficiary of the SNP government’s introduction of free personal care for the elderly. Public funding for this and other care services supported two-thirds of Balhousie’s clients in 2011, according to the company, a proportion that is likely to have grown since.
Ian McDougall is the director of the Glasgow Distillery Company, which was awarded £130,000 in regional selective assistance earlier this year by Scottish Enterprise. He also runs another business that helps others to get public grants.
Perhaps most interesting is Ivan McKee, whose company, Greenfold Systems, has twice hosted the First Minister, Alex Salmond, for SNP or pro-independence business events. Mr McKee has been a prominent spokesman for BfS – using Greenfold, a contract manufacturer and fabricator, as an example of how Scottish independence can work for business.
In December 2012, a few months after BfS was created, Greenfold was awarded £400,000 in regional selective assistance by Scottish Enterprise. The grant was given to create 65 new jobs at Greenfold’s Dunfermline factory, where it then employed 84 people, according to media reports.
However, almost two years on, few of these new jobs have been created. According to a feature on the company in the June 2014 edition of Fife Business Matters magazine, Greenfold still employs only 90 people. The latest accounts, for the year to September 30 2013, say that it is a “small company” with tangible net assets of only £135,000. Greenfold is registered in England and several contracts mentioned on Greenfold’s website appear to have been at least partly fulfilled by its sister companies in England.
The criteria for regional selective assistance state that any projects funded by it “must involve an element of capital investment” and be “mainly funded from the private sector”. Greenfold’s accounts for the period since the grant was awarded do not appear to show any significant capital investment or private funding on the company’s part.
--
But it is clearly not representative of Scottish businesspeople, the majority of whom will be voting No. Whether or not they are comfortable saying so is another matter, amid persistent reports – denied by the Scottish Government – that businesses have been threatened with losing contracts if they speak out. As with the abuse of civil service resources, described by The Telegraph last week, it is another example of how the Scottish official machine may be being bent to support independence.
“That’s why I got involved in the debate in the first place, I was so outraged that people were believing business supported the Yes campaign,” says Mr Hague, whose own business employs 200 people in West Lothian and does the vast majority of its trade across the border.
“The success with which the SNP managed to silence the CBI in this debate is stunning. They’ve silenced the voice of business and created their own artificial voice of business.”
Do the Yes voters realise that if its a Yes then they will have to run a balanced budget which is currently £10billion a year overspending. Just what will they cut so that from day 1 of Independance they do have a balanced budget.
As its such a huge amount in really curious as to what they will cut and if its benefits then the impact it will have to the poor and working classes.
Can we have a discussion in this narrow Independance point
As its such a huge amount in really curious as to what they will cut and if its benefits then the impact it will have to the poor and working classes.
Can we have a discussion in this narrow Independance point
Welshbeef said:
Do the Yes voters realise that if its a Yes then they will have to run a balanced budget which is currently £10billion a year overspending. Just what will they cut so that from day 1 of Independance they do have a balanced budget.
As its such a huge amount in really curious as to what they will cut and if its benefits then the impact it will have to the poor and working classes.
Can we have a discussion in this narrow Independance point
If they even realize this is the case, it will be The Tories fault for having the temerity to try and begin to live within their means.As its such a huge amount in really curious as to what they will cut and if its benefits then the impact it will have to the poor and working classes.
Can we have a discussion in this narrow Independance point
Welshbeef said:
Do the Yes voters realise that if its a Yes then they will have to run a balanced budget which is currently £10billion a year overspending. Just what will they cut so that from day 1 of Independance they do have a balanced budget.
As its such a huge amount in really curious as to what they will cut and if its benefits then the impact it will have to the poor and working classes.
Can we have a discussion in this narrow Independance point
The scary thing about this is that the SNP/Alex will just blame someone else. As its such a huge amount in really curious as to what they will cut and if its benefits then the impact it will have to the poor and working classes.
Can we have a discussion in this narrow Independance point
Alex: "If only nasty Westminster had given us a CU we would have been able to borrow £20Bn cheaply on the back of 55Bn rUK etc. But nasty tories wouldn't let us. I'm still King - which is great - so we'll just have to do the best we can."
Given all the other lies that he seems to get away with, blaming Westminster for the total fantasy that is the White Paper will be a walk in the park.
It seems Nationalism lets you get away with telling some people any old balls if its what their prejudices (that Nationalism has created over many years) want to hear.
Welshbeef said:
Do the Yes voters realise that if its a Yes then they will have to run a balanced budget which is currently £10billion a year overspending. Just what will they cut so that from day 1 of Independance they do have a balanced budget.
As its such a huge amount in really curious as to what they will cut and if its benefits then the impact it will have to the poor and working classes.
Can we have a discussion in this narrow Independance point
Won't the country just be run in a small deficit, like the rUK? As its such a huge amount in really curious as to what they will cut and if its benefits then the impact it will have to the poor and working classes.
Can we have a discussion in this narrow Independance point
el stovey said:
Welshbeef said:
Do the Yes voters realise that if its a Yes then they will have to run a balanced budget which is currently £10billion a year overspending. Just what will they cut so that from day 1 of Independance they do have a balanced budget.
As its such a huge amount in really curious as to what they will cut and if its benefits then the impact it will have to the poor and working classes.
Can we have a discussion in this narrow Independance point
Won't the country just be run in a small deficit, like the rUK? As its such a huge amount in really curious as to what they will cut and if its benefits then the impact it will have to the poor and working classes.
Can we have a discussion in this narrow Independance point
It will be the land of milk and honey.
For 4 years.
All that is missing is a technicolour dreamcoat.
el stovey said:
Welshbeef said:
Do the Yes voters realise that if its a Yes then they will have to run a balanced budget which is currently £10billion a year overspending. Just what will they cut so that from day 1 of Independance they do have a balanced budget.
As its such a huge amount in really curious as to what they will cut and if its benefits then the impact it will have to the poor and working classes.
Can we have a discussion in this narrow Independance point
Won't the country just be run in a small deficit, like the rUK? As its such a huge amount in really curious as to what they will cut and if its benefits then the impact it will have to the poor and working classes.
Can we have a discussion in this narrow Independance point
Also who would lend them any money on the open markets ? Especially after walking away from the debt built up when part of the UK c£150billion and counting for Scotland.
RUK would not lend them any money without any question after a 100% loss on a £150billion debt.
So back to the question what will be cut? Also £10billion on £55biion revenue is a much higher in year deficit than rUK that's why volatile oil price hammers the budget. Oil would be a lovely bonus if it is not part of the budget and has assumed production and price levels - this is the crux of it. I'd want to create the budget excl oil tax revenues then that tax rev can cover any deficit in year or be used to pay off the national debt and only once clear then set up an oil wealth fund (or let's call it state pension fund).
///ajd said:
BlackLabel said:
'Business for Scotland’ has played a vocal role in the Yes campaign, despite its members’ limited contribution to the country’s economy
So members of 'Business for Scotland' are essentially people who make very little money and employ relatively few Scots. Pointed out on here several times before no doubt.
Wow blacklabel, that is most damning dissection of BfS I've seen yet. Talk about sham.So members of 'Business for Scotland' are essentially people who make very little money and employ relatively few Scots. Pointed out on here several times before no doubt.
newspaper said:
The Yes side’s 200, not all of whom are declared members of BfS, include just three identified as active directors of public limited companies. The vast majority are small businesspeople such as guesthouse and shopkeepers, or sole traders such as consultants, designers and accountants.
Related Articles
--
Even more interestingly, a number of the leading BfS members – like the Yes effort generally – appear to have done quite well out of the Scottish public purse. BfS has seven directors, of whom four have substantial businesses. Three of the four – an unusually high proportion – have recently received substantial public support or subsidy for their businesses from the Scottish taxpayer.
Tony Banks, sole director of the largest BfS member business, Balhousie Care, a care home chain, is a beneficiary of the SNP government’s introduction of free personal care for the elderly. Public funding for this and other care services supported two-thirds of Balhousie’s clients in 2011, according to the company, a proportion that is likely to have grown since.
Ian McDougall is the director of the Glasgow Distillery Company, which was awarded £130,000 in regional selective assistance earlier this year by Scottish Enterprise. He also runs another business that helps others to get public grants.
Perhaps most interesting is Ivan McKee, whose company, Greenfold Systems, has twice hosted the First Minister, Alex Salmond, for SNP or pro-independence business events. Mr McKee has been a prominent spokesman for BfS – using Greenfold, a contract manufacturer and fabricator, as an example of how Scottish independence can work for business.
In December 2012, a few months after BfS was created, Greenfold was awarded £400,000 in regional selective assistance by Scottish Enterprise. The grant was given to create 65 new jobs at Greenfold’s Dunfermline factory, where it then employed 84 people, according to media reports.
However, almost two years on, few of these new jobs have been created. According to a feature on the company in the June 2014 edition of Fife Business Matters magazine, Greenfold still employs only 90 people. The latest accounts, for the year to September 30 2013, say that it is a “small company” with tangible net assets of only £135,000. Greenfold is registered in England and several contracts mentioned on Greenfold’s website appear to have been at least partly fulfilled by its sister companies in England.
The criteria for regional selective assistance state that any projects funded by it “must involve an element of capital investment” and be “mainly funded from the private sector”. Greenfold’s accounts for the period since the grant was awarded do not appear to show any significant capital investment or private funding on the company’s part.
--
But it is clearly not representative of Scottish businesspeople, the majority of whom will be voting No. Whether or not they are comfortable saying so is another matter, amid persistent reports – denied by the Scottish Government – that businesses have been threatened with losing contracts if they speak out. As with the abuse of civil service resources, described by The Telegraph last week, it is another example of how the Scottish official machine may be being bent to support independence.
“That’s why I got involved in the debate in the first place, I was so outraged that people were believing business supported the Yes campaign,” says Mr Hague, whose own business employs 200 people in West Lothian and does the vast majority of its trade across the border.
“The success with which the SNP managed to silence the CBI in this debate is stunning. They’ve silenced the voice of business and created their own artificial voice of business.”
Related Articles
--
Even more interestingly, a number of the leading BfS members – like the Yes effort generally – appear to have done quite well out of the Scottish public purse. BfS has seven directors, of whom four have substantial businesses. Three of the four – an unusually high proportion – have recently received substantial public support or subsidy for their businesses from the Scottish taxpayer.
Tony Banks, sole director of the largest BfS member business, Balhousie Care, a care home chain, is a beneficiary of the SNP government’s introduction of free personal care for the elderly. Public funding for this and other care services supported two-thirds of Balhousie’s clients in 2011, according to the company, a proportion that is likely to have grown since.
Ian McDougall is the director of the Glasgow Distillery Company, which was awarded £130,000 in regional selective assistance earlier this year by Scottish Enterprise. He also runs another business that helps others to get public grants.
Perhaps most interesting is Ivan McKee, whose company, Greenfold Systems, has twice hosted the First Minister, Alex Salmond, for SNP or pro-independence business events. Mr McKee has been a prominent spokesman for BfS – using Greenfold, a contract manufacturer and fabricator, as an example of how Scottish independence can work for business.
In December 2012, a few months after BfS was created, Greenfold was awarded £400,000 in regional selective assistance by Scottish Enterprise. The grant was given to create 65 new jobs at Greenfold’s Dunfermline factory, where it then employed 84 people, according to media reports.
However, almost two years on, few of these new jobs have been created. According to a feature on the company in the June 2014 edition of Fife Business Matters magazine, Greenfold still employs only 90 people. The latest accounts, for the year to September 30 2013, say that it is a “small company” with tangible net assets of only £135,000. Greenfold is registered in England and several contracts mentioned on Greenfold’s website appear to have been at least partly fulfilled by its sister companies in England.
The criteria for regional selective assistance state that any projects funded by it “must involve an element of capital investment” and be “mainly funded from the private sector”. Greenfold’s accounts for the period since the grant was awarded do not appear to show any significant capital investment or private funding on the company’s part.
--
But it is clearly not representative of Scottish businesspeople, the majority of whom will be voting No. Whether or not they are comfortable saying so is another matter, amid persistent reports – denied by the Scottish Government – that businesses have been threatened with losing contracts if they speak out. As with the abuse of civil service resources, described by The Telegraph last week, it is another example of how the Scottish official machine may be being bent to support independence.
“That’s why I got involved in the debate in the first place, I was so outraged that people were believing business supported the Yes campaign,” says Mr Hague, whose own business employs 200 people in West Lothian and does the vast majority of its trade across the border.
“The success with which the SNP managed to silence the CBI in this debate is stunning. They’ve silenced the voice of business and created their own artificial voice of business.”
Why has all of this not been shouted about louder? It's like I'm reading about some backwater African rigged election, not a democratic vote from a first-world country.
HD Adam said:
Do any of you seriously expect that the day after a Yes vote, Westminster cuts off the Barnett Formula and starts to negotiate what's best for the rUK at the expense of Scotland?
Seriously?
Do you expect to be independent within 18 months? Seriously?
It will take a few good years to sort things out.
One thing is for sure - Scotland won't get a great deal out of it.
HD Adam said:
Do any of you seriously expect that the day after a Yes vote, Westminster cuts off the Barnett Formula and starts to negotiate what's best for the rUK at the expense of Scotland?
Seriously?
Do you really think Westminster will pass independence without Scotland taking any debt? Hundreds of English and Welsh MPs would have to decide that is OK.Seriously?
Scotland will have to accept debt. The whole of the UK will continue to fund the whole of the UK.
HD Adam said:
Do any of you seriously expect that the day after a Yes vote, Westminster cuts off the Barnett Formula and starts to negotiate what's best for the rUK at the expense of Scotland?
Seriously?
Its a good question. Seriously?
On the one hand it is inconceivable that the rUK would want to do anything to harm Scotland.
On the other hand it is inconceivable that the rUK would compromise its own interests to above and beyond to help what would become a foreign country.
It is hard to know where they would start.
Currency is a great example. You could have rUK on one side making perfectly good arguments as to why there won't be one. And the SNP on the other saying "we have a mandate to have one - we must have one or we're screwed on trade, borrowing and GDP. we have a vote for independence, but we must have a CU to succeed".
Whose fault would that impasse be? Only the SNPs really for misleading the electorate, but they would spin it was a tory ploy. Would the SNP try and turn it into Devo Max as a compromise? Probably. I half expect the SNP to declare this is a backup plan at the last minute before the 18th. This could boost a Yes as it would feel much less risky if the SNP were to admit they might give up on full independence if they can't get what they want.
HD Adam said:
Do any of you seriously expect that the day after a Yes vote, Westminster cuts off the Barnett Formula and starts to negotiate what's best for the rUK at the expense of Scotland?
Seriously?
If there is a yes vote then I hope the day after 59 MP's have whatever cards that give them access to our parliament removed and that they take no further part in UK politics.Seriously?
Welshbeef said:
So back to the question what will be cut? Also £10billion on £55biion revenue is a much higher in year deficit than rUK that's why volatile oil price hammers the budget. Oil would be a lovely bonus if it is not part of the budget and has assumed production and price levels - this is the crux of it. I'd want to create the budget excl oil tax revenues then that tax rev can cover any deficit in year or be used to pay off the national debt and only once clear then set up an oil wealth fund (or let's call it state pension fund).
Therein lies the curse of oil. The UK is big enough to soak up the fluctuations in oil revenue - in a bad year we borrow a few billion more, in a good year a few billion less. It's only a % or two of the total so it doesn't worry anyone too much. For Scotland it'll be 20% or so of the budget, far too much to be able to borrow to cover in the event of an oil price crash. So if the price of oil drops the economy goes into the s
tter.Norway didn't put the oil into a wealth fund because it could; it did because it was the only fiscally prudent thing to do for a small country. As many have noticed, Norway's national debt is about equivalent to the value of the sovereign wealth fund - effectively they've spent the whole fund on general taxation, but have done it by borrowing against the security of the fund.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff