Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

Mexican stand-off over Scotland.....

14th Feb 2014
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

It's unbelievable , honestly . The 3 main parties are all united in their opposition to Scotland using the £ in the event of a "yes" vote . If nothing else is achieved out of the exercise it's that politicians are actualy capable of singing off the same hymn sheet. . Does this prove that politicians are truly capable of not opposing each other as an automatic instinct ?

Or are more sinister forces at play ?

Perhaps its because it's neutral in terms of English votes in the 2015 election....

I haven't lived in Scotland for a long time and I do miss the old country but there's a reason why so many Scots are to be found elsewhere , usually running the company or even the country ,  and it's because the opportunities up there are not as great as elsewhere for those with ambition . It was true when I was there and it's true I believe now from what I hear anecdotaly .  Looks like turkeys voting for xmas , or in this centenary since WW1 , perhaps the phrase "lions led by donkeys" is more apt  (remembering that the Lion Rampant is a Scots symbol)

Tags:

You might also be interested in

Replies (80)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By User deleted
14th Feb 2014 09:37

Confusion

For a minute I thought we were going to see sombreros and kilts in the same place! 

Still, it's delightfully childish - 'if you don't want to play with us then we're taking our ball back, and the bat that we're not actually using, and the rackets that we've never used, and the skipping rope that wasn't even ours... so ner!'

If I was Scottish I'd be opting for anything that would get rid of the politicians at Westminster! 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By majabl
14th Feb 2014 09:57

On the other hand, if Scotland were responsible for its own affairs then perhaps there would be more opportunities north of the border....

Thanks (0)
Replying to IANTO:
Norman Younger
By Norman Younger
14th Feb 2014 10:11

Opportunity knocks

I doubt it .  It is perceived as isolated (well it's not exactly the Midlands) and poor . Take a drive up the M74 and you can spend the whole journey weaving across 3 lanes and if you are feeling lucky (vis a vis camera vans on the few bridges) you can get some fair speeds . The place is deserted , so unless you sell to sheep and highland cattle you don't have a great market , except for a few niche products like haddock and chips or fried Mars bars . Margaret Thatcher shut Scotland down and it hasn't really reopened fully .

Thanks (0)
Norman Younger
By Norman Younger
14th Feb 2014 12:40

Alex Salmond

The more one reads about this the more one is convinced that it is all about Alex Salmond and his ego trip . Behind his smug smile is the sort of person that drove forward the Euro project simply for the sake of it and to be the people who "did it" .

Scotland - wake up !

Thanks (0)
Replying to lionofludesch:
Red Leader
By Red Leader
14th Feb 2014 13:16

@Paul

There is an interesting article on BBC News website about the tensions between China and Japan over WW2. It shows how these had almost disappeared by the 1970s but the Chinese Government for their own purposes stoked up feeling after Tiannamen Square in the 1980s.

I mention this as all the scaremongering about immigrants and foreigners is nearly always a ruse to distract the audience from failings elsewhere.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25411700

Good article anyway.

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
14th Feb 2014 21:12

Pointless sabre-rattling

Pointless, because it's not going to happen.

In the meantime, it's likely to be for the best if those that have probably never set foot north of Derby stay out of the debate.

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
14th Feb 2014 22:03

Politicians

Gordon Brown looked quite clever in comparison to David Cameron. Still ... there's not much to choose between the lot of them.

David Cameron suffers from 'foot in mouth' syndrome even more than Gordy did, and that is some achievement!

Thanks (0)
By ShirleyM
15th Feb 2014 08:58

Back to topic

Do you think they are wrong to refuse an independent Scotland the use of Sterling? I think there is logic behind the decision, and yes, it is a pleasant surprise that all parties are in agreement, for once.

The Euro has been the reason why Greece has had to be bailed out. If Greece had stuck to the Drachma then their bankruptcy would not have affected the Euro, would it?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
15th Feb 2014 09:54

Perfectly correct ...

To refuse to officially allow the use of sterling as Scotland’s currency.

AS is a consummate 'smoke & mirrors' politician and far more wily than his counterparts in the UK Government, who to date have seemed focused on appeasement rather than a sensible negotiated approach to independence. Of course giving in at every turn only encourages AS to bully everyone to get his own way and then shout 'foul' when someone says something he doesn't like

Interesting to note the reaction about refusing to honour their portion of the UK National Debt if they cannot have sterling, although, they could use it without permission but would need to hold large reserves. Perhaps that is way for them to proceed because it would keep Scotland happy and not put the rest of the UK at risk - although, they would not have any control over monetary policy and as a result one would have to ask whether this was really independence. Furthermore, no control over the money is very dangerous, especially when coupled with no-one to cover your debts -

Scotland the Panama, Ecuador and El Salvador of the northern hemisphere
http://www.adamsmith.org/news/press-releases/comment-an-independent-scot...

And no EU membership - although, that is a mixed blessing

There is already an historic 'debt'(?) for Scotland being bailed out in the first place (Act of Union - covering Darien problem) to the tune of approximately £400k around 1707 - http://www.scotshistoryonline.co.uk/union.html - which no-one seems interested in repaying, especially when compounded at say 5% for the past 300 years

Never forget the rest of the UK has not been given a voice in the proceedings, via the ballot box

Anyway are all these fudges really what the Scottish people understand by independence?

Thanks (0)
Norman Younger
By Norman Younger
15th Feb 2014 18:52

UK Debt

Does it really matter if Scotland was to go separate and foist it's "share" of the debt on the UK ? Given that it's mainly long dated and interest rates are low how big is the impact. I am more curious to know how the loss of oil revenue will hit the "remainder" of UK's balance of trade .

 

Thanks (0)
Norman Younger
By Norman Younger
16th Feb 2014 18:01

Another stand off ?

Forgive me but I am a wee bit lost over the above spat but it seems every bit as exciting as Westminster versus Mr A Salmond , Emperor in Waiting . Mind you now that the EU have stuck their paddle in Mr Salmond had better start looking for rabbits to produce from his very large sized hat

Thanks (0)
Replying to Portia Nina Levin:
By mrme89
16th Feb 2014 18:11

.

Flying Scotsman wrote:

Forgive me but I am a wee bit lost over the above spat but it seems every bit as exciting as Westminster versus Mr A Salmond , Emperor in Waiting . Mind you now that the EU have stuck their paddle in Mr Salmond had better start looking for rabbits to produce from his very large sized hat

Nothing exciting unfortunately,

It seems all that Mr Salmond has is dreams. I don't think he's credible enough (at all?) for the scots to vote independence.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By peterdell
16th Feb 2014 21:16

I hope Scotland votes independence because I want to see just how we intend to annex the Clyde, given the Scotland has the nukes. I can see the scenario Alex Salmond standing at Hadrians Wall shouting "we are going to nuke you English ******s) and David Cameron replying from London "no pocket money for those in the naughty corner and let that be a lesson to you" 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
16th Feb 2014 22:54

Has anyone thought ...

... that Cumbernauld is now the main collection office for HMRC, if it is a vote for independance will HMRC have to say "can we have our cheques back please"!

Thanks (0)
Replying to ireallyshouldknowthisbut:
avatar
By User deleted
17th Feb 2014 08:21

Likely outcome

Royal Cat wrote:

Have the Scottish people really thought this through ?

Judging by polls and anecdotal evidence, It would seem that most of them have.

Thanks (0)
Norman Younger
By Norman Younger
17th Feb 2014 09:16

HMRC

Closing HMRC payment office would probably mean closing Cumbernauld itself . Removing the nuclear stuff would take away another few thousand jobs . No doubt the civil service would swell to absorb those jobs in the support of Emperor Alex I  .

The Sunday papers report that business is more and more against the idea and the Economist ran a piece about Orkney and Shetland wishing to secede or join England . There was also a legal beagle on BBC last night who stated that the EU stance is a legal fact although there are clearly political elements at play and it is here that they will face the biggest challenge

I think the pipe dream is slowly being extinguished but Mr Salmond is on the exit ramp and therefore committed to his manouevre .  Not a good place to be standing

Thanks (0)
John Stokdyk, AccountingWEB head of insight
By John Stokdyk
17th Feb 2014 10:16

Reopened thread

This post was removed from view over the weekend because of an outbreak of behaviour that violated the site's terms and conditions.

We have attempted to remove the offending comments and those linked to them, but if any more posts are made that do not relate to the discussion that Flying Scotsman has started, they will be removed and the thread will be closed to further comments.

We're sorry for any inconvenience or disappointment caused, but all our members need to remember that this is a community for professional discussion and debate, not a forum for conducting personal spats.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
17th Feb 2014 10:20

Shetland - SNP refusal to allow their rights ...

'.. Economist ran a piece about Orkney and Shetland wishing to secede or join England ..'

Oops ! - so what happens to Shetlands share of North Sea oil - sequestered by SNP?

'.. The SNP has previously recognised the islands' right to decide their own future but has since changed its mind, with oil revenues vital to its economic case for separation ..'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/9794316/Alex-Salmond-war...

Interesting how Scotland wants the power to decide its own future but seems unwilling to afford the same rights to Shetlands etc. because oil revenues are one of the cornerstones of their policy
 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By JoeOBrien1983
17th Feb 2014 11:37

new

Opportunity knocksFlying Scotsman PM | Fri, 14/02/2014 - 10:11 | Permalink

I doubt it .  It is perceived as isolated (well it's not exactly the Midlands) and poor . Take a drive up the M74 and you can spend the whole journey weaving across 3 lanes and if you are feeling lucky (vis a vis camera vans on the few bridges) you can get some fair speeds . The place is deserted , so unless you sell to sheep and highland cattle you don't have a great market , except for a few niche products like haddock and chips or fried Mars bars . Margaret Thatcher shut Scotland down and it hasn't really reopened fully .

_________________________________________________________

 

Very strange comment here. I'm still trying to make sense of it.

Why would a road that's quite be of any relevance to Scotland as a whole?

I once drove down the M6, very quite. Would it be fair to suggest that here in England its deserted and only good for selling sheep and cattle? Very strange.

I would leave the patronising to those who live in Scotland and know what they're talking about.

Edinburgh and Glasgow are great cities and will be a credit to Scotland, regardless of whether they are in the UK or not. Scotland has a GDP higher than the rest of the UK bar London and the South East (commuting to London territory). If Scotland went independent they would be the 7th richest country in the world by GDP per head.

These areas are worth discussing. Not how busy a quite borders road is.

 

Thanks (0)
Replying to North East Accountant:
Norman Younger
By Norman Younger
17th Feb 2014 13:07

M74

It was to emphasise a point , that Scotland is "out of the way" and not such an economically busy place . A motorway is a pretty good measure of the economy - look at the depths of the recession , congestion was down and you saw far less people tearing down the outside lane . I don't feel I was patronising in any way .

Yes Glasgow and Edinburgh are fine cities and the natives throughout the country are friendlier than south of the border . Scotland produces a disproportionate number of leaders in business , science and politics throughout the world. It's part of being Scottish - there is a need to punch above one's weight

By the way have you ever driven along the M74 ?

 

Thanks (0)
By mrme89
17th Feb 2014 12:20

@ JoeOBrien1983 - The GDP per head is higher only when taking into account North Sea gas & oil revenues.

 

When these reserves run out (predicted to be around 100 years), what situation would Scotland then face?

 

Look at the tax revenues generated by Scotland of £56.9b and then start to compare with its outgoings:

NHS Scotland £11.35b budget

Scottish University £1b budget

Scottish Police £1.1b budget

Scottish prison service £365m budget

Scottish legal aid budget £149m

 

I've only mentioned a few core services.

 

Scotland cannot miraculously pull a booming economy from its proverbial.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By JoeOBrien1983
17th Feb 2014 12:26

mrme89

That's correct, it does include Oil. But seeing as it a major factor in the wealth of the nation (and indeed the UK) it undoubtedly needs included. It's like looking at the income for England and not including London.

Lets not forget that Scotland, over the last 30 years since the records began, have paid in more tax than they got back. In every single one of the last 30 years.

Scotland agrees that it can't base it's entire future on a volatile commodity, however, they feel that by them having the decision to make for themselves, that they will be able to escape the trend in the rest of the UK where all roads lead to London.

People in the UK, not just Scotland and tired of being overlooked by London.

I think that's what this is about.

If Scotland feels it would rather go it alone, then good luck to Scotland.

But lets leave out the half truths and nonsense, leave that to the politicians who will say anything to stop them voting Yes.

 

Thanks (0)
Replying to bernard michael:
Stepurhan
By stepurhan
17th Feb 2014 12:38

Reference?

JoeOBrien1983 wrote:
Lets not forget that Scotland, over the last 30 years since the records began, have paid in more tax than they got back. In every single one of the last 30 years.
Have you got a link for the statistics that back up that assertion? I'm not doubting that you are saying it with a sincere belief it is true. It is just such an important factor in the debate that I'd like to be able to check the numbers for myself. It would be silly to continue the discussion on the premise this is true if it turned out to be based on a misinterpretation of the figures.
Thanks (0)
avatar
By JoeOBrien1983
17th Feb 2014 13:00

Including a geographical share of North Sea oil and gas revenues, Scots generate £10,700 per head in taxes compared to £9,000 per head in the rest of the United Kingdom, according to the Scottish governments national statistics. 

Scotland also receives greater public spending per head than other areas of the UK; in February 2012, the Centre for Economics and Business Research concluded that "Scotland receives no net subsidy".

Overall, Scotland generates 9.9% (£56.9bn) of the UK's tax revenues with just 8.4% of the UK population. Since 1980/81 Scotland has contributed £222 billion more in tax revenues than if it had just matched the per capita contributions of the UK. 

 

_____________________________________________________________

 

Check the national statistic of Scotland, freely available to anyone willing to read about it. There's lots there.

You have to ask yourself this. If Scotland had nothing to offer the rest of the UK. The same politicians would out on the streets pleading that they part ways with the rest of the UK. The same people who are on talking about currency and EU, would be on talking about important matters like, they're skint!

Why aren't they.

If it was me, wanting to keep Scotland to stay in politics. I wouldn't be wasting my time with currency debates, I'd be highlighting how much a burden they are on the rest of the UK. But instead, it's only about the pound. I wonder why.

The currency issue will become pragmatic if they go independent. The UK will look at it with a mindset that would be for the benefit of the rest of the UK. It won't be a closed topic then, if it was, they're not doing the job right. Why would they want to devalue the pound and risk charges to businesses here in the rest of the UK.

The EU. Are they really going to say no to the biggest future renewable energy provider, oil producer, biggest fishing area in Europe?! Why would they? The country is in now, has laws and directives that the EU use now and could bring a lot to the equation. It's simply desperate Westminster politics or over dramatisation at best.

Thanks (0)
Sarah Douglas - HouseTree Business Ltd
By sarah douglas
17th Feb 2014 23:06

I like living in Scotland as I did when in England

Having been down and up the M74 many a time with plenty of traffic.  Maybe it was empty because everyone was working. Car ownership in Scotland is much lower and more people use public transport as it is a faster way to get around Scotland. 

As many know I love the UK ,all of it but I do find the OP post negative about a place where he no longer lives. This is just a view point from someone who lives in Scotland but is not from there .

I am not sure I agree with the OP post.   I am Irish and I moved to Scotland and I love it.  He mentions he no longer lives in Scotland and in my opinion has an extremely negative view.  If you take the independence debate out of it Scotland what are you saying nobody should bother and they should move to England where there is a housing crisis and people are living on flood planes.  ( That is called Sterotyping) as that is not the case for the whole of England but I just trying to demostrate a view ) 

I believe things change everywhere  and they do not stay the same.  For example Glasgow has changed massively in the 15 years since I moved here to being a very vibrant place with fantastic business resources not to mention shops to die for and definitely not isolated anything but.   ( No I am not a Martin Lewis fan, if he had his way their would be no shops )  The Glasgow Chamber of Commerce are doing a excellent job bringing businesses together which covers the whole central belt and beyond . 

Most people I know are running successful businesses have a good life style and are growing.  Do I think the same big salaries are earned in Scotland in most cases no.   However what I do know is that I have a lot more money left for fun and travel then some of my friends in London and other parts .  In order to have the same lifestyle and similar house in England I would need to earn twice as much and even then I would not have the space I do. 

Yes England has larger Salaries but they also have larger Mortgages which are cripling some of my friends.     The comment about Scots being found everywhere else  applies to all parts of the UK .  For example all the emigration from the UK to Spain , France Australia and many others.

Anyway I like the whole of the of the UK and all regions and parts of the country  have good and bad parts.  

    

Thanks (0)
avatar
By JoeOBrien1983
17th Feb 2014 17:27

Thanks for your input Sarah.

Refreshing given its positive slant from a neutral, if you disregard the suspiciously Scottish name.... I kid!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By JoeOBrien1983
17th Feb 2014 17:37

Regarding Salaries though...

... I have to say that in my experience, salaries are roughly the same through the UK with the exceptions being London and Aberdeen.

House prices have soured in the South of England, but I'd put this mainly down to population pressures rather than them having more disposable income.

Thanks (0)
Sarah Douglas - HouseTree Business Ltd
By sarah douglas
17th Feb 2014 18:18

Even more suspect

my maiden name is Needham .

Thanks (0)
avatar
By peterdell
17th Feb 2014 20:35

Another reason to vote independence.

Why on sports bulletins do we get the details of the Premiership and then the Scottish Premiership second. Sometimes we will hear nothing about the other football divisions. The championship is the fifth largest league in Europe surely this should take priority. A leeds/forest match is surely more important than Hearts/Celtic. I suspect that League 2 has more of a following than the scottish prem. And at other times we have to listen to Scottish division three results before we see the tables. Only 50 people attend these games, nobody not even those who live there care. My local park team has a bigger following. 

Thanks (0)
Stepurhan
By stepurhan
17th Feb 2014 22:10

Link?

So is there a link for these figures that are being quoted or not? It's a simple enough question. If the figures aren't just pulled out of thin air, and I'm presuming they aren't, there is presumably a website for them.

I have done a search for National Statistics of Scotland and, whilst it is throwing up official looking sites, none of them appear to readily have the statistics being quoted here. I don't want to spend hours trawling through statistics only to find they don't include the information I need. Is it really too much to ask for a pointer?

Thanks (0)
Sarah Douglas - HouseTree Business Ltd
By sarah douglas
17th Feb 2014 23:08

The Peoples independent Uk State of Women (and a rant )

Hi 

If we were to vote independence on the football results and bulletins then there should be a UK Independent State for women. How many town centres all across the country lose business because of Football and their behaviour  at times where women avoid the centres because a team may win our lose. 

It was so nice during the Olympics to see so many different sports covered on the news.  Now we are back to the same old football news and who hurt their toe, how they really wanted to win that game and hours of mindless football commentary .  I love people who play sport and have plenty of friends who play football and other sports .  So instead of hours mindless football commentary on the radio and tv why can,t we have programs that actually show all sports.  I love sport and would love to see more instead of men or women talking about football.   No wonder 50% of the population turn off the sports news.  

Before anyone says anything I do not mind them showing the games but do we really need the games to analysed and for the tv companies to bore us to death about someone toe or shin or he said that so I said that back.  

I would let men into the UK state of Women but the criteria would be that they would like to see other sports then just football and even take part in them.   (I am in Jest) 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By peterdell
17th Feb 2014 23:15

Real men listen to cricket commentary talking about buses and pigeons and all sorts. Football is just something that we watch and listen to, to get rid of the women so we can indulge this passion. Agers and Tuffers bantering away. Another reason we should split from Scotland. Highlands cricket isn't going to catch on.

 

The Women's state already exists on the high street (albeit in decline). We the (men's state) according to the previous post has two hours per week, women's state has it the rest of the time. I went looking for trousers yesterday, there was three men's shops and most trousers in them had elasticated waist bands. Elasticated waiste bands its an outrage.There is no way women would put up with this!  The state of the high street for men is as bad as the amount of women's sport shown on TV. 

Thanks (0)
Sarah Douglas - HouseTree Business Ltd
By sarah douglas
18th Feb 2014 00:31

Okay fair enough , but as women we also love sport

Okay but sometimes the football supporters disturb our high street and our womens state.    I actually like cricket my husbands family all played at St Michaels Dumfries.

yes your dead right elasticated waist bands are never to be tolerated only for boys under ten .  You are right this should not be tolerated for either sex.   However there are loads of male shops in Glasgow.  But that is a long way to travel.  From experience BHS , Debenhams, John Lewis, H&M, TK Max  and Top Man all do a great selection for men .  Debenhams and TX max even has all the designers for the men with clothes cut well. 

On a happy note it is amazing to see all the British women doing so well at the winter Olympics.  The snowboarding medal was fantastic and now the curlers. Even if they don,t win medals I think they have all done really well.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/winterolympics/article-2561558/Sochi-2014-Eve-Muirhead-Great-Britain-facing-Canadas-curling-invincibles-slip.html

Thanks (0)
avatar
By peterdell
18th Feb 2014 00:38

Sarah

Two of the shops in your list were in the three I went to. When are we going to get a variety of designers and styles that women have and while I am on a fashion rant why should men wear ties. Its an anathema?  Do women still wear fashion items designed in the 1940s (unless you are wearing vintage) 

Anyway what's your sense in Scotland about how the vote is going? There is a feeling down here that the No to independence should win, but inevitably it will be lost by the Tories who will make outlandish threats and just annoy everyone to the point they vote yes.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By peterdell
18th Feb 2014 00:50

Sorry just to clarify I googled when ties came into fashion and apparently it was around the 1850's and not the 1940s. I think that says it all really.

Thanks (0)
Sarah Douglas - HouseTree Business Ltd
By sarah douglas
18th Feb 2014 02:27

My thoughts

My family relatives in Scotland are spilt, some for some against and the majority undecided and sick to the teeth of it.  At the moment the non deciders could change the vote but have gone into hiding.  Most people I have spoken to up here thought it was out of order and bad timing for the 3 parties when they should have used the same united front to help people in the South West region.   After all the message is better together . The way they jumped hoops for the thames demonstrated how badly they have all treated the South West.  If I am really honest most are not bothered and just want to get on with life and have switch off from the debate.  Most have relatives in some part of the UK.

In my business centre that is want most people thought and felt for the people flooded.  Most are sick of the negative stories from the 3 parties personally I think they are playing right into the hand of Nationalists.  It is hard to stick up for no independence with the way they are behaving and dripping of negative articles every week.  I would like to knock all their heads together.

re shopping I never have any problems in those shops but Glasgow does have a large selection. Now you know I like a tie and waistcoats.  It goes back to my youth days.  Of course you don,t have to wear a tie it is a look I like though as well as many others.  Yes there should be way more fashion for men.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By JoeOBrien1983
18th Feb 2014 09:22

Link?stepurhan PM | Mon, 17
Link?stepurhan PM | Mon, 17/02/2014 - 22:10 | Permalink

So is there a link for these figures that are being quoted or not? It's a simple enough question. If the figures aren't just pulled out of thin air, and I'm presuming they aren't, there is presumably a website for them.

_____________________________________________________________

 

http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN06625.pdf

Page 7. spending per head in Scotland £10,152

Page 12, North Sea Oil included - £10,730

Page 12 - Scotlands revenues account for 9.9% of total revnues - greater than its share of both population and spending. 

Thanks (0)
Replying to Chris.Mann:
Stepurhan
By stepurhan
18th Feb 2014 20:42

Misrepresented figures.

JoeOBrien1983 wrote:
http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN06625.pdf

Page 7. spending per head in Scotland £10,152

Page 12, North Sea Oil included - £10,730

Page 12 - Scotlands revenues account for 9.9% of total revnues - greater than its share of both population and spending. 

Thank you for providing the link. As I suspected, the figures you provided do not tell the whole story. If you look at the figures you linked to properly you will see that the situation is actually the opposite of what you describe. Let me clarify.

First up, the easy part. The spending figure you quote is only identifiable spending, that is spending that is directly attributable to Scottish citizens. It ignores non-identifiable spending, which is for the benefit of the UK as a whole, but not readily associated with a particular area. (e.g. defence spending). If you include that as well then the spending figure rises to £12,134. Both these figures appear in tables on page 6. It seems unlikely an independent Scotland will have no spending in these areas, so your income higher than spending is already looking suspect.

Now let's turn to the income. The figure you quote is the highest figure shown in the table on page 12, being the per head income if, AND ONLY IF Scotland retains the oil and gas rights based on geographical area (essentially areas of fishing rights). If it only retains a per capita share then the income figure drops to £8,913, so you already have a shortfall, even with just identifiable expenditure. It seems likely that the actual split of rights will be negotiated somewhere in-between, but it's still not looking good.

But, just for the sake of argument, let's assume that identifiable expenditure is all expenditure (£10,152 expense) and that Scotland obtains all geographical rights (£10,730 income). So Scotland is making a profit, right? Unfortunately not, £1,995 of that income figure is from the oil and gas rights (shown separately on page 10 or calculated from page 12). These are from the 2011/12 figures. If you look at paragraph 3.1 you will see that total revenues in that year were more than £11 billion but were only £6.5 billion in 2012/13. Factor in that drop in just the £1,995 element of income and you are already looking at an ACTUAL shortfall of £238.00 per head. But it gets worse. Look at the forecasts on page 11 and this is expected to drop from there, with a low of £3.5 billion possible. At that level there is a shortfall per head of £782.00.

So not quite the simple rosy picture you painted then.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By JoeOBrien1983
18th Feb 2014 09:43

I'm not so sure.
Some interesting figuresJohn T PM | Mon, 17/02/2014 - 22:34 | Permalink

This BBC summary seems to be a fair representation.  What appears to be clear is that the SNP are gambling on grabbing most of the oil for Scotland, whereas in fact much of the reserves they lay claim to are situated under what would become English territorial waters.  Perhaps I'm a cynic, but isn't it strange how Scotland became so interested in independence after the oil was found, a bit like Argentina became interested in the Falklands once it was suspected that there may be oil there?   http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-24866266

________________________________________________________________

Why do they insist on including the figure without oil?

It's like calculating England's GDP and doing it without London. Madness. The sceptic in me would say they're trying to protect the million in TV license money they current receive.

Lets look at it another way.

In the 70's we had to go to IMF to get a bail out. The UK was described as the poor man of Europe. At one point,we couldn't afford to get rubbish lifted off our streets.

Suddenly they find Oil in the north sea, sell of the council houses and then invest the vast majority into London to create a strong capital for the UK. We're now one of the richest again.

Should we pay the Scots back the money we received? Or is it all one way? Should we just tell them, thanks for the trillions in oil, but the Daily Mail says you lot don't pay your way, so we all reckon you can get stuffed.

Thanks (0)
Norman Younger
By Norman Younger
18th Feb 2014 10:36

Crux of the matter

The whole independence story looks to me like it is infused with a generous dose of jingoism and flag waving . It's a very Scottish thing to do ,and I still do it down her in England . I get ribbed all the time about being Scottsh and of late independence. I don't mind and I  play their game.

To me it looks like the "game" has been pushed to the boundaries  by Mr Salmond and it is about his ego trip . With road signs sprouting up in Gaelic in some areas you can feel nationalistcreep beign foisted upon people.

Being together is always better - strength in numbers , unless there is a compelling reason to split up and that reason has not been made compellingly. Now the debate is shrouded in tactical threats and the politics of "us and them" .

The status quo works  , why should somebody agitate to change it?

 

Thanks (0)
Replying to Tim Vane:
Norman Younger
By Norman Younger
18th Feb 2014 13:45

Immigrants

An immigrant perhaps , but not illegal , unless England passes a law on forced repatriation . Mind you I contribute to the economy by pay taxing and employing people so I have a feeling that you lot (the Sassenachs) would allow me to stay .

They question is what would happen when I passed Checkpoint Alex at Gretna ? Would they let me back out again ?

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
18th Feb 2014 11:01

Just for the record ...

... real men watch rugby! (but only when they get too crocked to play any more!).

Thanks (0)
Sarah Douglas - HouseTree Business Ltd
By sarah douglas
18th Feb 2014 15:00

Ego Trips

I am confused by your original post, it appears to say we better together which I don,t disagree but then on the other hand it comes across as if you are critising Scotland.  Why if we are better together are the 3 parties you seem to support running such a negative campaign.  It seems a very strange tactic, your scum and a drain on society but we still want you.  Correct me if I am wrong but the campaign would be better if it focused on the good things as I have said there playing a very dangerous game all of them.  I don,t see any ones hands being tied in these photos.

From what I see in Scotland they all have Ego trips not just Alex . What about that stupid smirk for Mr Osbourne getting into the taxi in Edinburgh.  Alexandra and Alister were no better.  Their worse then kids in a playground. My 10 year old and his class mates would behave better. They should all be put in jail and someone lock the key.  

I must live in a different city here is a picture of the Olympics parade which I attended with my son at George Square Glasgow.  Yes we love flags we had 4 with us 2 Uk and 2 Scottish one for each hand.  We were happy for the UK team at George Square. We are well able in Scotland to see through them all.  As far as I can see here there are equal flags.   The media don,t like you to see these pictures as they prefer to cause a great big argument between countries.  Perhaps if they came and spoke to us instead of having pre conceived ideas about what the Scottish do and how they behave. 

 

There is nothing wrong with having pride and that is for all countries.  Yes  I am in there with my son trying to get a close of Chris Hoy I had sore shoulders the next day. 

Thanks (0)
By mrme89
18th Feb 2014 11:10

@JoeOBrien

The link you provided shows revenue (without North Sea oil) to be £46.3b and public spending to be £64.5b

 

How would Scotland address the immediate deficit?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By JoeOBrien1983
18th Feb 2014 11:21

mrme89

I would suggest they tell us that the oil revenue is there's as it's in Scotland.

Or are you suggesting that they would need to find the money from elsewhere because another country is taking all the money from their natural resources?

How do you suggest that the UK attends to their deficit that has been on going for decades?

Why are we able to deal with such matters, and Scotland wouldn't.

Thanks (0)
Replying to HSTONE:
By mrme89
18th Feb 2014 11:39

.

JoeOBrien1983 wrote:

I would suggest they tell us that the oil revenue is there's as it's in Scotland.

Or are you suggesting that they would need to find the money from elsewhere because another country is taking all the money from their natural resources?

How do you suggest that the UK attends to their deficit that has been on going for decades?

Why are we able to deal with such matters, and Scotland wouldn't.

 

Even including North Sea resources of £56.9 there would still be a defecit. I've already stated that the North Sea oil revenues are not a long term revenue stream as they will eventually run out.

 

The UK could help cut their deficit in a number of ways, including reducing foreign aid.

How much would Scotland set aside every year for foregin aid?

 

The oil revenues would depend on how it is split, which is yet to be negotiated. If by border it would mean Scotland would get around 90% of the revenue, but if by population, it would only receive about 9%.

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By JoeOBrien1983
18th Feb 2014 11:26

UK defiict

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_344397.pdf

 

mrme89

 

Could you tell me how the UK will address their immediate £84 billion deficit each year.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By JoeOBrien1983
18th Feb 2014 11:31

Or possibly this would make a better reading...

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/12/12/uk-deficit-figures_n_4430765....

That deficit in Scotland with oil is looking like small change now.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By JoeOBrien1983
18th Feb 2014 12:07

mrme89

OK, so foreign aid. That's ca 11 billion, if you feel that letting starving children die in Africa is the way forward that would certainly help. 

Based on the 0.7% of GNI, it would mean about £137 a head so that's about £685 million. Scotland can set aside whatever they want, that comes with Independence and certainly won't be agreed on an internet forum between us two.

I think you'll have a hard time getting it through the courts that the UK gets oil reserves in Scotland. So lets try be realistic on the matter.

This may be wrong, but I think I read somewhere that the oil is expected to run for 100 years? That may be wrong.

Thanks (0)
Replying to ninathomas2000:
By mrme89
18th Feb 2014 12:04

/

JoeOBrien1983 wrote:

OK, so foreign aid. That's ca 11 billion, if you feel that letting starving children die in Africa is the way forward that would certainly help. 

Scotland can set aside whatever they want, that comes with Independence and certainly won't be agreed on an internet forum between us two.

I think you'll have a hard time getting it through the courts that the UK gets oil reserves in Scotland. So lets try be realistic on the matter.

This may be wrong, but I think I read somewhere that the oil is expected to run for 100 years? That may be wrong.

 

What about the countries we give to that have nuclear and space programmes? It should be more selective than just throwing it away ay anyone.

If you believe that all the money that is given to Africa goes to the starving children, you are sadly mistaken.

 

I also read 100 years for the supply. As I said, taking into account North Sea revenues is pointless as its not a permanent revenue stream.

Thanks (0)

Pages