Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Rebellion over SNP finance package grows in public and private sectors

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 28 November 2008
PRESSURE continued to mount on the Scottish Government yesterday as business and council leaders drew battlelines over SNP policy.
As revealed in The Scotsman, leaders of Scotland's leading business organisations, known as the Group of Six, met with John Swinney, the finance secretary, to demand he drops plans for a 3p local income tax (LIT).

The SNP government was also facing revolt from councils over free school meals, continuing the council tax freeze and two of its plans to tackle the recession.

The meeting involved CBI Scotland, the Federation of Small Businesses, Institute of Directors, Scottish Council for Development and Industry, the Chambers of Commerce, and Scottish Financial Enterprise.

They warned Mr Swinney that "the gloves would be off" if he pursued a policy which would be "disastrous" in a recession.

Afterwards, David Watt from the Institute of Directors said: "There was a free and frank exchange of opinions."

Mr Swinney said: "Our proposals are a tax cut for Scotland, putting money into the pockets of low and middle-income households. Scotland would have the lowest local tax in the UK, as well as the fairest."

The business leaders received their answer two hours earlier in First Minister's questions when, under questioning from Labour leader Iain Gray and Tory leader Annabel Goldie, Alex Salmond insisted his government would press on with replacing the council tax with LIT.

But Ms Goldie has demanded the First Minister clarifies claims he made to her that there will be a rise in income-tax take in 2011 of 18 per cent, rather than a fall.

"As far as I am aware, the 18 per cent increase to which you refer does not appear as economic data in the Pre-Budget Report," she said. But a source close to Mr Salmond said: "The figure can easily be extrapolated from the information available."

There were also continued rumblings from senior figures in Scotland's 32 councils, with behind-the-scenes moves toward demands for more cash to deliver the council tax freeze than the £70 million on offer.

Yesterday The Scotsman also revealed anger over Mr Swinney's claims he would decide how to spend £260 million of capital spend brought forward to tackle the recession. Councils said it was theirs to decide how to spend. A source close to Mr Swinney seemed to soften the line last night, saying: "We need to work together in partnership for the benefit of Scotland."

The issue was presented as evidence that the concordat between councils and the Scottish Government was unravelling.

A vote by parliament to allow councils to provide free school meals to all children in P1 to P3 classes could also lead to conflict. Up to 23 councils have threatened to not deliver the policy, even though it is part of the concordat because of tight budgets.

A further row emerged over the SNP's £100 million accelerated programme of building affordable housing. It has emerged that Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire may not get to apply for the money, even though they have to pay part of the extra £40 million contributed by councils.

Aberdeenshire and Glasgow council sources confirmed this.

Liberal Democrat North-east MSP Alison McInnes branded it "an outrage." However, a Scottish Government spokesman said: "Claims from the Lib-Dems that certain local authorities areas are not allowed to bid for accelerated funds are completely false."


BACKGROUND

THE problems faced by the Scottish Government with councils centre on the "historic" concordat signed last year.

The deal was that councils would freeze the council tax in return for extra funding and attempting to deliver SNP flagship policies including reducing P1 to P3 class sizes to 18 and give the same year groups universal free school meals. In return, councils would have their budgets freed up to spend as they wished.

However, this relationship has begun to fragment. Up to 23 councils have claimed there is not enough money for free school meals and there is nothing ministers can do to force them to provide them. But the biggest fight will be over the council tax freeze next year. Many councils have said it cannot happen without significantly more money.

Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 28 November 2008 9:26 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Scottish National Party
 
1

Rufus T. Firefly,

27/11/2008 22:59:02
The list of organisations that do not want the LIT is growing by the day. Too numerous to post on here.

Only a minority of the public want it.

An even smaller minority of the working population want it.

The LIT is a busted flush.
2

Rufus T. Firefly,

27/11/2008 23:05:16
Why should income from savings be exempt whilst dividend income is not?

Both of them are taxed at the moment.

So why only take extra tax from one and not the other?

What a Ham and egg idea. Whoever thought this scheme up should be sacked.
3

,

28/11/2008 00:13:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

Fifi la Bonbon,

28/11/2008 00:17:25
All these so-called "organisations" are nothing but traitors, conspiring with London Liebour to do down the ordinary folk of oor ain country in a massive conspiracy.

Either that or they aren't, but rather are civic-minded Scots pointing out that this is a half baked additional income tax for ordinary Scots, to be imposed on us without proper planning, and without the Scottish Executive having secured agreement with the UK govenrment over matters like council tax benefit.

The only thing to take heart about is Mr Swinney's reported remarks about partnership. Let's see if he means it, or if he will continue to support his bosses' cynical use of their time in office to try to break up the United Kingdom instead of governing in the interests of the people. I won't be holding my breath, though.
5

,

28/11/2008 00:18:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

Millerman1,

STOP THE SNP 28/11/2008 00:19:15
The snp got token power through the protest vote and are making a complete mess of this part of the UK, can you imagine if they had full powers, no wonder people from all walks of life especially business would relocate down south.

Union is best.



7

Fifi la Bonbon,

28/11/2008 00:20:49
McKellerator, he does have a point about taxing some types of income and not others. No tax is popular, but this proposal is unfair.
8

subrosa,

28/11/2008 00:21:49
"The Group of Six" = Unionists, most of them labour supporters and all determined to ensure that Scotland stays as the junior part of the UK. Aye right.
9

,

28/11/2008 00:22:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
10

Fifi la Bonbon,

28/11/2008 00:23:39
Subrosa, my first sentence was meant to be satirical but you really believe this stuff. Remember, nobody can make you feel inferior without your consent!
11

,

28/11/2008 00:24:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

Millerman1,

28/11/2008 00:25:35
I predicted Glenrothes would be the end for the snp, seems i was right again just as i said what the majority Labour would win Glenrothes, it shows just how bad shape the snp are in when Labour is at its worst in history it can still leather the snp by thousands and thousands of votes.

Regarding loonie tunes John Mason he will be out in the next election so far he has done nothing for Glasgow east apart from dance around like a monkey in a cage.lol.

Union is Best.
13

Conan the Librarian™,

28/11/2008 00:27:36
Damian.

Does he have a big dug?

And a good lawyer.
14

Fifi la Bonbon,

28/11/2008 00:29:53
#12 - I don't know whether you are a labour supporter or just an anti-nationalist, but we should all remember that labour didn't leather the SNP, the voters did.

I think the voters in the east of Glasgow will perceive that Mr Mason hasn't done anything for them, and those who voted for him will not do so a second time. But the reason he got in was that labour took voters for granted. They almost certainly won't do so again.
15

Conan the Librarian™,

28/11/2008 00:31:11
GB007

Subtle.
16

The Strategist,

28/11/2008 00:45:35
People who hold shares tend to better off than those that simply have some saving. Ergo providing relief to savers will have a broader impact.
17

Conan the Librarian™,

28/11/2008 00:45:36
Och fifi, an entrenched Labour stronghold, that got a long...long...time for seven thousand postal votes to make the difference.

Strange how he voters of Fife were treated differently to the ones in Glasgow...

After a Labour defeat.
18

,

28/11/2008 00:46:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
19

,

28/11/2008 00:48:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
20

,

28/11/2008 00:57:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
21

,

28/11/2008 01:03:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
22

Embra Don,

28/11/2008 01:26:54
#17 Conan the Librarian
Strange that the contract to build aircraft carriers at Rosyth has gone quiet (again). Its been announced five or six times whenever votes need to be bought - but is apparently now under review (again).
23

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 01:51:08
I see the Irish government is going to try to push another referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. I don't know about other readers but the EU is beginning to look a bit anti-democratic. After independence I'd like to see Scotland reject that lot.
24

Edward,

28/11/2008 01:55:42
David Maddox now repeating the Labour breifings
its so laughable.The tell tale bit in this article as with the Maddox 'piece' yesterday is the phrase 'the Group of Six' This was something dreamt up by the Labour spin doctors to sound official and big, except its neither! and of course the same catchy phrase was repeated by Ian Grey at FMQ's as if by magic. It is indeed curious that we have not heard this phrase before, but then again it was only dreamt up by Labour within the last week!
25

PC Caledonia,

28/11/2008 02:00:13
Conan the Librarian™ is a survivor!
26

Fifi la Bonbon,

28/11/2008 02:01:26
If there's six distinct organisations, and they are acting together as a group, "the group of six" is a fair enough name to call them.

I don't suppose you'll be happy until the press calls them something like " traitors, conspiring with London Liebour to do down the ordinary folk of oor ain country in a massive conspiracy".

Or something.

27

Fifi la Bonbon,

28/11/2008 02:02:08
If there's six distinct organisations, and they are acting together as a group, "the group of six" is a fair enough name to call them.

I don't suppose you'll be happy until the press calls them something like "the group of six traitors, conspiring with London Liebour to do down the ordinary folk of oor ain country in a massive conspiracy".

Or something.
28

Fifi la Bonbon,

28/11/2008 02:03:07
I must remember that the "preview comment" function is there for a reason!
29

PC Caledonia,

28/11/2008 02:10:22
The Spook, on the other hand, is a tawt.
30

tartangladbach,

edinburgh 28/11/2008 02:12:18
here's a game too play, look at the headlines on politics page then simply guess who wrote them? i've been playing all week! and get david "ruth" maddox everytime! do not agree with his politics! however thought he was good in hi de hi
31

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 28/11/2008 02:12:58
Lazy Davie Maddox, reprinting his briefing notes from Simon Pia rather than writing stories.

I don't see why the Unionist mob gets so worked up about LIT.

It is not even going to be implemented until 2011. At which time we may already have had the referendum with the choices of status quo, fiscal autonomy or independence.

Unless the electorate opts for status quo (highly unlikely), most off the arguments against LIT will be nullified by the results.
32

PC Caledonia,

28/11/2008 02:23:31
His language is deplorable
33

subrosa,

28/11/2008 02:27:34
I see the Times hasn't let us down - another SNP bashing:
article.http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article5248366.ece

Really it's time the SNP stood up to these councillor bullies. I've had enough watching them be considerate and understanding.
34

subrosa,

28/11/2008 02:29:52
# 12

Why do you want to live in Scotland? It's not a country for people who appear to have such hatred of their fellow country people.

Or perhaps you're of the generation who thinks London and labour are just the best thing ever. Possibly. I knew the standard of education in Scotland has dropped over the past 25 years.
35

Guga II,

Rockall 28/11/2008 03:43:36
Another press release by David MadDog and the Hootsmon, on behalf of the New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party (North British Branch).
36

,

28/11/2008 04:39:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
37

Phil C,

28/11/2008 05:20:20
More muscle flexing from the onionists. More power to the Nationalist elbow.
38

donald,

glasgow 28/11/2008 05:40:22
The tax is based on the ability to pay. Why should householders bear the burden, when many earners escape council tax? Why should pensioners living in their own homes have to pay Council tax, whilst whole families of non Council Tax payers enjoy Council services and get off "Scot" free

Sir Hugh Fraser lived in a hotel, was waited on hand and foot and claimed tax rebates, whilst not having to pay any rates.

The average Scottish householder paid double the rates of Thatchers' huge Barrat Hoose in Engerland.

Glasgow has more people on benefits and therefore less people to pay Cooncil Tax. The poor will benefit and the wealthy will lose on LIT. That is why Labour is running true to form with its war on the people it holds in poverty.
39

,

28/11/2008 05:44:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
40

sainty,

paisley 28/11/2008 05:59:49

last week i was at a family gathering. the topic of discussion turned to politics: afghan, iraq, etc., but eventually got round to independence.

what was interesting about this discussion was how those present, sided. it dawned on me that those who were vociferous in their opposition to independence fell into a distinct group: 55yrs old and above.

those in the house who were pro-independence were in their early 40's or under.

then i thought back to the glenrothes campaign. when gordon brown et al were visiting. it appeared that those he was filmed talking to were of a pensionable age plus.

my conclusion is.

i genuinely believe that independence is a generation away. the old spirit of the blitz attitude is a redundent amongst the young. as these labour voters shuffle off their mortal coil, those of us still breathing gods air will see a brighter future on the horizon. yes it might be 15-20 years off, but the times they are a-changing.
41

Angleland Isover,

28/11/2008 06:39:02
The labour party in Scotland are like religion in Scotland. Although People don't believe in it anymore they still adhere to it because that's how they were brought up. #40 is correct more young people are thinking for themselves nowadays and throwing of the shackles.
42

,

28/11/2008 06:50:24
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
43

Watson,

Irvine 28/11/2008 06:56:05
Is the herald still in business? Just wondering as I stopped visiting their site after the comments were doctored. I wonder when this "paper" will go the same way? Regarding the Scottish Government; they have done more for the people of Scotland in just over a year than Labour has done in the past 50 years. Will someone please tell me the benefits that we get from this Union.
44

John S,

28/11/2008 06:56:07
#40 sainty, ref your age divide observation, this is borne our by this poll.
In the June 2008 TNS poll on Scottish independence, there was six age groups, in the four 18-54 age group range, in each group the majority said I agree, in the two remaining groups 55-65+ the majority in each group said I disagree. Peak group for the I agree was the 35-44 with 49% and I disagree 65+ with 55%.
Final poll result was I agree 39% and I disagree 41%.Don't know 21%

45

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 28/11/2008 07:00:58
The game is up. Given his past record, how long will Salmond last?
46

Alan Reid,

Skive 28/11/2008 07:04:20
Still not anwsered my question Rufus?
Instead of talking cack maybe you can tell how Labour or any other party would be better for Scotland, then again are English, and you would hate for Scotland to better itself!
47

Rufus T. Firefly,

28/11/2008 07:05:01
#46 John S

Thanks for clearing that up.
48

Fred Quimby,

28/11/2008 07:05:11
Maddox

says it all
49

,

28/11/2008 07:06:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
50

,

28/11/2008 07:11:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
51

Jimmy Le Pie,

28/11/2008 07:11:54
I really enjoyed watching that odious article, Dougie Alexander, being utterly humiliated on last nights QT.

Superb viewing!
52

Newton_Invented_Gravity,

28/11/2008 07:16:18
Just in case no one's noticed: the SNP don't actually have a majority in the parliament. They can only propose their plans. It will only pass if other party's agree with it.
If it does pass, it will pass on it's merits.
53

,

28/11/2008 07:18:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
54

Jimmy Le Pie,

28/11/2008 07:18:40
#39

The audience at Question Time last night didn't sound like they rated Broon & Darling!!!

Dougie Alexander was positively squirming with embarrassment as the Plaid Cymru MP, Adam Price, wiped the floor with the slimy article.

New Labour Sleaze are doomed!!
55

Rufus T. Firefly,

28/11/2008 07:20:22
HM treasury now owns 57.9% of RBS. What a disaster.

Mind you if it was not for the UK Government and Gordon Brown RBS would have gone bust.

All Alex Neil achieved was getting the RBS staff Christmas Parties cancelled (which incidently was only costing £10 per head).

What a miserable git.

56

,

28/11/2008 07:20:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
57

john z,

edinburgh 28/11/2008 07:22:13
School meals:

The Government is NOT forcing councils to provide School meals. The facility has now been made available - but they can choose what they do. In hard times, many, many families will welcome free school meals. A very good idea.

Not sure why anybody is whinging about it.
58

,

28/11/2008 07:22:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
59

,

28/11/2008 07:29:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
60

,

28/11/2008 07:30:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
61

fiferjohn,

28/11/2008 07:37:15
watch this space gordon brown will try and cancel the general election in the name of the recession .
police state here we come.
62

Ugly George,

28/11/2008 07:41:15
60 sm753.5
"Moron an Independent Scottish government could and would have bailed them out with the same money used by the UK government i.e money taken from Scotlands 137 billion annual GDP"

Oh dear - you obviously do not understand how GDP works. As it is the total value of goods and services it takes the form of what people earn. So how would a Scvottish govt get its hands on another £30bn of what people earn - more tax. £30bn is almost 3 times as much as the total already paid per year in income tax in Scotland. Check the Scottish govt's own figures.

I suggest that you learn more about these issues and develop some understanding of them before you resort to calling somebody else a "moron"
63

Rufus T. Firefly,

28/11/2008 07:41:51
#63

How do you cancel something that was never scheduled to happen?
64

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 28/11/2008 07:42:48
#39BTO

"Brown and Darling are the Lennon and McCartney of the world of politics."

If you mean half dead and married to a cripple(labour policies), then you are right.

BTO, Charles and Rufus T.Firefly are the Curly, Larry and Moe of political commentary.

65

Mercutio,

FALKIRK 28/11/2008 07:53:24
I am no secessionist but LIT has my qualified support.
66

,

28/11/2008 08:03:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
67

,

28/11/2008 08:11:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
68

fiferjohn,

28/11/2008 08:13:19
rufus there has to be an election in 18months but brown will say that the economy is to fraglie to have one at this time and put it off.
69

,

28/11/2008 08:17:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
70

Rufus T. Firefly,

28/11/2008 08:18:10
#70 Therefore he cant cancel the election John.
71

Rufus T. Firefly,

28/11/2008 08:22:39
#66 Kampung

So John Lennon is only half dead?

And Paul McCartney is married?

Just goes to show how you NatZ are so divorced from reality.
72

,

28/11/2008 08:32:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
73

fiferjohn,

28/11/2008 08:32:26
#72 if he can get opposition mps arrested for doing there job and showing labour up then he can do anything .bet your looking forward to your id card so government can keep track on you.
74

TWC,

28/11/2008 08:42:31
14 Fifi la Bonbon,Poodle by name
I predict that the people of Scotland have seen the through the "Snakes & Ladders" economics of Labour and will vote for whoever gives them Fiscal Control and that may be SNP the way things are going.
All the usual Lemon Suckers are on here and offering nothing (with one exception) we won't win the people with negative attacks on SNP all the time.
Tell people the reasons for a Union.
75

,

28/11/2008 08:43:07
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
76

,

28/11/2008 08:48:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
77

TWC,

28/11/2008 08:48:23
Just finished on the Goopd Morning Scotland, a couple of ex editors saying that the Hotsmon and the Herald appeared to be afraid to talk positively about the other options availabel to Govern Svcotland and that they (possibly combined as one) neeeded to change their reporting to be more positive though not necessarily pro SNP.

I knew they were seen as bias by more tha the posters here.
78

,

28/11/2008 08:49:09
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
79

,

28/11/2008 08:50:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
80

,

28/11/2008 08:53:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
81

BIG EYE,

Paisley 28/11/2008 08:57:55
Hate to rain on the Unionist parade but I/my company are a member of at least three of them and like many other members of the same are in FAVOUR of LIT.

The orchestrated campaign by this newspaper against LIT must be even boring the sub editors that even the headline does not mention LIT by name.

Possible because even the biased Scotsman has identified that readers just ignore any story with yet another headline attacking this popular alternative to the discredited and grossly unfair Council Tax!
82

Baillie Guthrie,

28/11/2008 09:02:35
of course the Scots Government could have borrowed the money to
recapitalise RBS like the UK government will have to do.

83

TWC,

28/11/2008 09:05:33
The two newspapers will almost certainly have to combine to make a competative Newspaper for Scotland. They need to reflect the whole of Scotland not just the new labour poodles who add a quick rubbish post here to remove it from prime position.
New Labour are finished, scottish Labour need to break away and seek to manage from Holyrood until they do we should vote against Labour.SNP
84

salmondella,

UK 28/11/2008 09:06:41
Here we go again - the NATS are once again in denial. whenever there is a critical analysis of their flagship policies by any organisation, big or small, its all a conspiracy according to those who have yellow and black specs stuck on to their noses. Any reports from any quarter that they do not like, including suggestions to help and improve out lot are instantly condemned -shoot the messenger is the order of the day from the dreamers of independence. Its time they turned their bitterness towards their own party leaders -its them who are making such a mess of things. However, sticking your head in he sand seems to be the favourite hobby of the NATS and we are all suffering as a result.
85

,

28/11/2008 09:09:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
86

,

28/11/2008 09:10:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
87

T-bone,

28/11/2008 09:11:18
#76 & #79 You guys need to wake up and smell the coffee! Although I'm no fan of Gordon Brown, or his policy bereft government, this is a very transparent and opportunistic attempt by the SNP to sneak in the 3p LIT using the current finiancial situation as a smokescreen.

Trying to introduce policy measures by the back door will backfire. The electorate in Glenrothes understood that, and come the time, rather than booting out Labour the people of Scotland will be booting out the SNP!
88

Baillie Guthrie,

28/11/2008 09:13:45
"I will do anything and everything to ensure the case for the Union" Gordon Brown.

This doesn't just mean the SNP any more.

Only a general election can stop him now.
89

TWC,

28/11/2008 09:15:25
90 BeenThereOnce
Listen poodle the SNP I may not like but their posts are at least positive not driven by hate like the Pro New Labour posters here. Like that party which ruined the Labour Party they make stupid statements and attack whatever they cannot debate intelligently.
the Fed and ALanB amongst othere have enlightened debate some of which is truly educational and opinion forming.
Grow up!
90

,

28/11/2008 09:17:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
91

,

28/11/2008 09:18:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
92

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 09:19:03
#64 Ugly Doerge.

You are wasting your time - we (you, Alan b and myself) tried to explain to Spanners the difference between National Income and GDP a few weeks back.

Either he is completely thick or, more likely, he is masquerading as a Nat to make them look thick.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose!!
93

,

28/11/2008 09:19:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
94

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 09:19:37
#97 Should be directed to Ugly George!!
95

watcher,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 09:20:28
Salmond was a bank Clerk so you can`t expect him to work miracles.
96

,

28/11/2008 09:21:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
97

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 09:22:25
85 Baillie Guthrie
"of course the Scots Government could have borrowed the money to recapitalise RBS like the UK government will have to do."

You obviously do not understand how borrowing through the international bond markets works. The £31bn required to bail out HBOS and RBS would constitute almost 30% of Scottish GDP. This would have to be added to any existing borrowing and represents a huge proportion of income. If the bond markets were to finance such a large loan as a proportion of income, the purchasers would have to pay a large amount in insurance against default through credit default swaps. This would make the bonds prohibitively expensive to buy.

By contrast the £31bn is less than 3% of UK GDP so does not carry the same degree of risk.

The situation is very similar to obtaining a mortgage. If you have a total income of £50,000 pa you can easily get a mortgage of £100,000. But can you get a mortgage of £100,000 if your income is only £5,000 pa?
98

Baillie Guthrie,

28/11/2008 09:22:56
Jesus was a carpenter
99

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 09:24:07
This looks like another re-hashed story - so I'll just re-hasj my previous posts on the issue!!

My initial problem with the proposals was that it was not actually a LOCAL Income Tax. Fortunately it now seems that there is going to be a sunset clause that at least puts a timescale on making sure that happens.

Most other objections relate to technical issues with the tax - it is impotant that the Scottish Government listens to these genunie concerns and takes action to ensure that these problems do not occur.

What they do not want to do is be like the Labour Party. Labour need to take their heads out of the sand. If they genuinely support a property tax (and I have no problems with that) then they really need to tell us what it is instead of giving us all this airy-fairy guff.
100

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 09:25:13
One thing should be clear - retention of Council Tax in its prsent form is not an option.

It at the very least needs reforming if not replaced.

Certainly an argument could be made to bring in more directed assistance for groups such as pensioners who have been worst affected by Council Tax. A case could also be made for more frequent, independent revaluations. It would be far better than the nonsense of basing bands on notional 1991 values.

Personally though I would rather have a complete rethink over local taxation and there are definitely more radical alternatives out there.

Whatever system is put in place must, in my opinion, strengthen not lessen the accountability role of local taxation. However it is because the financial and functional relationship between central, Scottish and local government is so intertwined that accountability is a real problem.

In truth, since and before devolution, Scottish and central government has habitually managed its own expenditure by forcing local government to take on Scottish and central government responsibilities. Consequently, many Scottish Councils have had to raise Council tax year after year to cope with these increased financial pressures.

It is this deep-seated dilemma that must be dealt with if any logical system for local government finances is to be created. The functions and finances of local government must be divorced from those of the Scottish and central Governments.

One could argue that the problem is not Council Tax per se but much more fundamental and deep-rooted problems. If LIT is introduced then it must also be done in such a way that these issues are addressed as well.
101

TWC,

28/11/2008 09:25:46
99 ploughmans lunch
We need to keep the debate reasoned, there are benefits from being in the union, the qustion is do the negatives outweigh the benefits.
At the moment with the Governments opinion about Devolution / Calman I would say the Union is loosing.
Devolution cannot work without control of Finances & resources.
102

,

28/11/2008 09:26:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
103

Miss H,

28/11/2008 09:27:46
Couple of brief points. The LIT is dependent on Westminster continuing to pay benefit to compensate for those whose incomes fall below the threshold at which they become liable for taxation. If Westminster refuses to do that then obviously the policy can’t happen. There would of course be a backlash to that which would benefit the SNP but so be it, if that is the way they want to play it.

But that also makes the point about income tax take fairly meaningless. If income tax take falls as a consequence of the recession it is because people have lost their jobs and therefore their salary. They therefore become eligible to claim council tax benefit – and would become eligible to claim LIT benefit if it is paid on the same basis as CTB.

So when politicians or journalists say woooh income tax take is going to fall because of the recession – well so is council tax. Because if people don’t have sufficient income to be liable to pay income tax they also don’t have sufficient income to be liable to pay council tax.

As for the ‘Group of Six’ – a title which nobody had heard till yesterday when the Scotsman made it up – it is natural that they will want to make their case and they have every right to do so. But they are not in any position to make demands because they have no mandate. If they want a mandate let them stand for election. I think we can all guess how they would get on.


104

Doh,

28/11/2008 09:28:49
LABOUR AND TORY TAX BOMBSHELL

So if you or your partner lose their job, and you are having trouble paying the Council Tax, dont worry you can always sell your house at considerable cost and at the bottom of the market.

Taxes should not be based on the ability to pay.
105

,

28/11/2008 09:29:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
106

Warden An' All, Reborn,

28/11/2008 09:29:32
Glenrothes was proof if any were needed that the majority of good honest Scottish voters will vote tactically to protect the Union.
I still say that LIT runs short if council costs rise faster than wages or benefits. Which services will wee Eck ditch first?
107

Ugly George,

28/11/2008 09:29:48
102 sm753.5
No you do not know enough about GDP. The GDP is already allocated to others in the form of their income. If you take £31bn of this income to bail out the banks who are you going to take it from. Do you think that £137bn just sits in mid air waiting for somebody to use it. The £137bn represents peoples earnings and wages in the form of the value of the goods and services yhey produce. That is what GDP is in effect. You seem to think that GDP is the same as tax revenues - it is not. Please do us a favour and buy a book on elemnetary economics.

Once agaqin you reveal your total lack of understanding and attempt to hide this by resorting to insults and abuse.
108

Publius,

London 28/11/2008 09:30:43
Things are getting very scary.
(1) Opposition MP arrested for finding out that Home Office suppresses information. His home searched by nine (?) spooks on the day when security supposed to be on high alert because of Mumbai. His office searched by more spooks. No 10 denies prior knolwedge of arrest, although leader of opposition and mayor of London were informed by police beforehand.
(2) RBS falls into the hands of the state. Peston, BBC economics reporter, prattles about the taxpayers becoming majority shareholders of RBS. Rubbish. Shareholders attend the meetings of the company, vote for the Board and for major changes of direction. RBS is now controlled by Brown and Mandelson (who probably fed the taxpayers-as-shareholders to Peston).
(3) Ruling party in Scotland obsessed with LIT, which is almost certainly dead.
What next?
109

Baillie Guthrie,

28/11/2008 09:32:08
#103 Thank you George I thought you would mention credit default swaps to make you look clever. But tell me, what is the percentage of UK GDP the government will have to borrow to raise a trillion pounds and 2) what will the bond insurance be for that. And what is that compared to Italian CDS insurance.
110

Publius,

London 28/11/2008 09:33:06
#109 Miss H
"The LIT is dependent on Westminster continuing to pay benefit to compensate for those whose incomes fall below the threshold at which they become liable for taxation. If Westminster refuses to do that then obviously the policy can’t happen."

Decoded this means that Salmond and Swinney are about to give up on LIT.
111

,

28/11/2008 09:33:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
112

,

28/11/2008 09:35:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
113

,

28/11/2008 09:38:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
114

Elephant,

Lilithgow 28/11/2008 09:38:46
Tell me if I'm wrong, but doesn't a big slab of council tax go into council workers pensions? You know, that bit which says West Lothian gets £500 a year of what you pay. I wouldn't actually mind paying separately (or more) for things like rubbish collection, using the library and putting in a planning application, if it exposes the bloating of gold plated pensions. It'd be great to receive a bill for 'Council Pension Charge 2008 - £412 please'. I wonder how many of us would default on paying that!
115

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 09:39:40
#111 "111 sm 7531/2,28/11/2008 09:29:08
106

Your the idiot which tried to argue a case for LVT but couldnt explain how to collect it from a block of flats."

I think you are confusing me for someone else. All I have said is that LVT - which is the Green's preferred form of local taxation - should be examined along with any other possible for of local taxation. I have consistently said that I want a complete rethink over local taxation.

But then you are so obtuse you probably think I said something else.
116

Miss H,

28/11/2008 09:41:02
118 In any case £31 billion is chicken feed in the scheme of things.

The UK's national debt will reach £1,084 billion by 2013/14.

That's over a trillion I believe. Though I always thought Trillion was the name of the girl in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy - never realised it was a real number.
117

Miss H,

28/11/2008 09:42:39
121 The SNP examined it and rejected it pretty much on the how do you collect it from a block of flats argument.

Until LVT proponents can answer that it's not going to go any further.
118

Miss H,

28/11/2008 09:43:41
116 Absolutely not.
119

Westfield Bairns,

falkirk 28/11/2008 09:44:12
LITS going to happen. Lovely, just feel the Anti-Scottish Unionists going into convulsions


The Scottish Unionist held in contempt by Scottish and English alike
Scotsman - Nulabour Ministry Of Propoganda
Hows your circulation figures lol
120

Elephant,

Linlithgow 28/11/2008 09:44:50
Anyone heard the news that the average Scot now earns 28k per annum - up 25% in 5 years. Well done whoever you are.
121

Alan B,

28/11/2008 09:48:13
#Elephant

What about house price inflation of 150% over the last decade?
122

Miss H,

28/11/2008 09:50:21
126 In fact the median salary in Scotland is £20,192.

The median salary for men is £25,012.

The median salary for women is £15,894.

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_labour/ASHE_2008/2008_res_la.pdf
123

Alastair the First,

28/11/2008 09:50:48
One of the organisations reported to be against LIT is the Federation of Small Businesses. Well, I am a member of that organisation, and I wasn't even asked for my opinion. These people are giving their own personal views, not the views of their members. I believe they have vested interests. They should be more honest about their true agendas.
124

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 09:51:02
#118 It is you who consistently makes a fool of yourself - whether you are sm 7531/2, Winged Messenger, spanners, parcelofrogues or what ever your alias of the moment happens to be.

My top two idiotic Spanners moments:

No 1 - Spanners thinks that Government Income and National Income are the same thing.

No 2 - Spanners thinks that a country does not have to issue bonds and securities through a Central bank - even though every other country in the world does this.

125

Miss H,

28/11/2008 09:51:30
127 Of course politicians have no direct control over the police and nor should they.
126

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 09:52:27
117/118 sm753.5
But now you have changed your line. You were saying that the £31bn would be money "taken out of" Scotland's GDP in post 60. That is waht I was replying to. Now you are saying that it would be borrowed. Please be consistent.

As far as the situation regarding borrowing goes please read post 103.
127

Darien,

Panama 28/11/2008 09:56:07
#122 Interesting context - the £31bn pittance Westminster grudgingly 'gives' Scotland is equivalent to just 3% of the debt Darling & Brown have saddled the UK with. LIT is really a very small side show for a mickey-mouse Parliament which spends pocket money compared to Westminster. The real deal now is the economic mess and misery created by Brown & Darling. The ISSUE for Scots is how to extract themselves from the UK Titanic and secure full control over all income and expenditure and law making - i.e. Independence.
128

Warden An' All, Reborn,

28/11/2008 09:57:25

119-sm 7531/2-Inroads are only as good as what you are able to accomplish when you have done so. The Unionist Parties have accomplished a victory where once they were facing defeat. The nats accomplished grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory. When people unite to take on a common enemy they can accomplish much more than they can individually.
129

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 09:58:13
Let's be honest - the debate on this issue would be entirely different if we had full fiscal autonomy.

The present block grant system based on the Barnett formula is a recipe for pass the buck when it comes to taking responsibility. Holyrood blames Westminster because it says it does not have enough finances; Westminster MPs (especially in the North of England) moan that Scotland gets too much; and so on.

With full fiscal autonomy it would make the Scottish Parliament fully responsible for its actions and unable to pass the buck when things did not go well. Equally there would be no more England subsidises Scotland arguments as it would be a completely redundant argument.

That all being said, the real issue for me is not how we raise monies but how it is spent. There is still a real problem in Scotland of the economy being over-reliant on the public sector - crowding out is an issue that does need to be addressed.
130

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 09:58:53
(#136 continued)

Crowding out is an acknowledged observable fact and international evidence states that the size of the public sector, public sector output and public sector investment all affect private sector investment and activity. The evidence available seems to show that Scotland does not suffer from fiscal/public finance crowding out ie it does not require an increase in taxation revenue to fund expenditure within Scotland. There appears instead to be resource crowding out due to large scale public sector investments particularly at the upper wage level of the labour market and in the construction sector.

Although there is evidence of resource crowding out, reducing investment and growth, I am not saying that this should lead to a decrease in public sector expenditure and employment. There is always a trade-off between public sector activity and private sector growth. What I believe needs to happen is that the Scottish government needs to improve long-term economic growth. In the long-run public expenditure as a %of Scottish GDP in Scotland could then be lowered. It is therefore important to make sure that public expenditure is as productive as possible. This means trying to make efficiency gains where possible and by engaging the private sector where it can be shown the private sector delivers the service more effectively.

Although the Framework for Economic Development in Scotland creates a structure for the public sector to support the private sector it does not actually involve any sort of substantive action. We have nothing like Ireland’s National Development Plan. Ireland's NDP is a logical and lasting plan to assist in the financing of large infrastructure projects and is quite clear in what the priorities should be for investing in physical and human capital. Most importantly, the NDP makes clear what the specific priorities for economic growth should be.
131

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 09:59:26
(#138 continued)

Without a commitment to planning for long-term growth, a post-independence Scottish government would find itself under pressure to reduce public sector expenditure. It would have difficulty in justifying continued increased public sector expenditure and may end up cutting expenditure where it should not be cut.
132

,

28/11/2008 09:59:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
133

Publius,

London 28/11/2008 10:07:20
To Miss H

Miss H 109: "The LIT is dependent on Westminster continuing to pay benefit to compensate for those whose incomes fall below the threshold at which they become liable for taxation. If Westminster refuses to do that then obviously the policy can’t happen."

Publius 116: "Decoded this means that Salmond and Swinney are about to give up on LIT."

Miss H 124: "Absolutely not."

Please expelian. If your #114 doesn't mean that the SNp are giving up on LIT, what does it mean?
134

,

28/11/2008 10:07:37
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
135

Elephant,

Linlithgow 28/11/2008 10:07:43
That disparity is appalling ain't it? Must be one of the worst in the Western World. I find it even more disturbing that its only 25k for South East England - poor sods. That's ten times salary to get a two up two down house.
136

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 10:08:14
134 Darien
"Interesting context - the £31bn pittance Westminster grudgingly 'gives' Scotland is equivalent to just 3% of the debt Darling & Brown have saddled the UK with"

You have to remember that this figure is not the only aspect of public expenditure in Scotland. It only covers those aspects which come under the authority of the Scottish parliament. As such, it does not include other features such as the biggest item of expenditure - social protection (ie old age pensions and social security payments).
137

Elephant,

Linlithgow 28/11/2008 10:08:33
ps that was for Ms H 129
138

brownlie,

28/11/2008 10:10:40
Sorry for going off topic but we are not allowed to comment on the news that a Tory MP has been arrested for allegedly "leaking" information regarding government policies.

Will Brown and Darling now be arrested for leaking the facts regarding the budget before Parliament was informed?

This leaked information could only have come from the Treasury and Darling as the Chancellor and Brown as the First Lord of the Treasury are ultimately responsible for the Treasury.

139

,

28/11/2008 10:10:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
140

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 10:14:03
139 Jwil
"Why doesn't he write something about the fact that Labour are making no immpression on the banks which are withholding funds from business."

Many people have made this point but what is the essence of it. Virtually everybody said that the banks got themselves into trouble with irresponsible lending to people who then could not pay the loans back. HBOS had to write down £1.7bn in bad debts from its corporate banking division for the first 9 months of this year - ie it lost £1.7bn in bad loans to businesses.

Now people are complaining that the banks won't lend to businesses.
141

Publius,

London 28/11/2008 10:15:30
#139 Jwil

Westminster is approaching the problem from the wrong end. The economy probably doesn't need a fiscal stimulus. The price of manufactured goods relative to income has been falling for years. What is needed is a freeing up of credit for business. This won't be acheived by the government bullying the banks but it may be achieved by the government underwriting loans to business - or underwriting the companies that insure against defaults on business loans.
Even if a fiscal stimulus is required there are better ways reduc8ing VAT by 1.5 pecentage points, e.g (a)by raising the income tax threshold and paying for this by cutting back on complex tax allowances for the rich, or (b) by reducing VAT to, say, 5 per cent on home improvements and thereby getting some building workers back to work and/or out of the black economy and so recouping some of the costs.
142

Ugly George,

28/11/2008 10:17:20
145 Brownlie
Actually I think he was arrested for receiving leaked info not for actually leaking it.

Actually, I did not see the point in leaking parts of the budget. Surely all that does is give political opponents a chance to prepare their argument in response.
143

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 10:18:52
#145 There are no comments because this could be seen as an issue of subjudicy.

Natural justice and all that should mean that reporting (and that includes comments) should not be prejudicial either way.

I would rather wait and see what the full facts were before coming to an opinion on the matter. I still don't believe we have the whole story regards what has allegedly happened.
144

G,

dndy 28/11/2008 10:20:53
Are all these scare stories due to people's perceptions of SNP's financial incompetance or is this another "Unionist conspiracy"?????

After listening to Swinney's witterings about finance, I know which option is more likely...does anyone understand what he is on about???
145

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 10:21:16
The group of six don't really like anybody. Here are some of their previous musings:-

15th October 2007: "SCOTTISH business organisations are joining forces to fight the tax changes put forward by Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, in last week's Pre-Budget Report.

The "big six" business organisations are to maintain an "open channel of communication" to draw up battle plans in response to the Chancellor's announcement."
146

,

28/11/2008 10:21:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
147

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 10:21:44
148 Publius
I agree with you on the VAT issue. I cannot see that a temporary reduction of 2.5% is going to stimulate people into buying. I also agree with the aspect about VAT on building building. I would have scrapped that entirely for two years thus, as you said, encouraging people to satrt things like home inprovement projects as the saving for them would have been substantial.
148

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 10:26:39
#147 The problem is though that they have gone from lending will-nilly to not lending at all. There needs to be lending but somewhere between the two extremes.

I am increasingly of the opinion that the Government should just cut out the private banks altogether regards getting the mortgage market and business lending moving again. They have two nationalised financial institutions in the shape of Northern Rock and Bradford & Bingley, not to mention a 57.9% stake in Royal Bank of Scotland. Why not use these three to do the job?

Obviously they would need to ensure that any lending was within tight strictures. No quadruple/quintuple-salary mortgages. No 100%+ mortgages. Strict certification of incomes for mortgages/business loans and so on.

Is there any reason not to go down that route?
149

brownlie,

28/11/2008 10:27:13
149 George

Yes, he was arrested for receiving leaked information but there is no point in having leaked information if you do not use it and I understand that was the position here.

Whether there was any point in leaking parts of the budget or not the fact remains that information was leaked by the Government.

If leaking or receiving information is against the law it must follow that any information leaked by the Government falls into that category.
150

steve52,

Kinfauns 28/11/2008 10:28:14
That Rufus T is a right one aint he.....I have not spoken to one member of the public who is NOT in favour of LIT. I have not read anything from good ole Rufus about our new Secretary of State Jim ( honest) Murphy stating on question time that there would be NO tax rises to pay for the mess Labour has got the country into. No a word about the sneeky way Labliars were/are going to increase VAT. Labour MSP's dont want LIT as it would mean them paying more than they currently do for council tax.

Not a word about the banks we the public gave billions to and they wont lend it out.

What ever happened to Mr Broons promise at the Glenrothes ellection to take legal action ( hahaha) against power companies? Has Mr Broon taken up with Glasgow Council his surprise that the charge more for home care than Fife Council?

I wonder if it was Lord George that managed to get Darling to sort out the whiskey tax!!! Or did a certain other sponging Lord threaten to burn down the House of Commons if Darling did not do something!!

While we struggle with fuel bills to keep warm this winter some Labour Lord will simply burn his curtains to keep warm.

Another scoop for Maddox....if he ever decides to leave the Scotsman I am certain that the SUN will seek his services. At least the SUN comes up with better headlines. I note no comments were allowed on his front page scoop yesterday....cant take the truth eh.
151

Queen D,

Glasgow 28/11/2008 10:31:09
Anyone interested in the Aberdeen story of the council and the auditors should read the Press and Journal for a balanced report.
152

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 10:31:26
The LIT proposal is a tax too far! However, the Opposition parties have hardly offered any alternatives.

In 1978, Ireland abolished domestic property taxation and the Irish tax-payer ended up with higher income tax rates! The remainder of the funding was raised with higher business rates for commercial and industrial property owners. So much for local accountability?
Irish local authorities now rubber stamp central government plans with very little input?
153

Queen D,

Glasgow 28/11/2008 10:35:30
Steve 52 , if you are referring to a Labour Party press release with Mr Maddox name on it , there were indeed comments , most unflattering ,however they vanished .
Probably helped by the actions of some misfit whose comments were ridiculous, accusatory and abusive.
And I'm sure they were pounced upon as an excellent excuse to stop any further debate.
154

Arfur,

28/11/2008 10:35:51
2/3rds of business support LIT

2/3rds of tax payers support LIT

most political parties in Scotland support LIT (in some shape or form)

Its going to happen (in some shape or form) so get over it you pathetic winging unionists. I mean how sad are some of you. You would prefer an unfair tax system for people rather than seeing LIT get through as you know it will be a success and is fairer.

BTW - I have been hearing allot of people who are connected to some of these organisation and have not been asked a thing. If that's the case it is shocking and I would suggest that if you are in a similar boat then complain whether you support LIT or not. I mean in some cases what's the point of the organisation if it doesn't listen to its members?

BTW2 - Did you see Alexander on Question Time last night? What an embarrassment. I particularly enjoyed the old boy who could hardly speak due to rage, giving him a right going at. Poor fool couldn't find one person in the panel or the crowd that would support him. Finished himself off brilliantly as well when trying to make a case for the trafficking thing and what you should do (ask her) - laughed off the programme - brilliant.
155

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 10:38:36
"A majority of Scots" back plans to replace council tax with a local income tax, Scottish ministers have said.

The claim was made after the Scottish Government said 55% of people who responded to a consultation believed a local income tax was the fairest tax."

BBC 24th Nov 2008
156

brownlie,

28/11/2008 10:39:37
150 The Fed

The Scotsman's head-line ""Stalin style" arrest of Tory MP by terror police sparks fury" hardly fits in with your theory that "reporting ....should not be prejudicial either way".
157

Dunfesterin,

Stevie's bird's house 28/11/2008 10:41:14
First things first - F**K the opinion of the public sector!! Those overpaid, underworked bu**ers need to realise its the taxpayer who pays their wages and they should get the going rate for what they do and no more. Anyone affiliated to Labour (ie: the unions) should be ignored full stop, imagine supporting a party of lying warmongering b**tards?

Secondly - ignore Roofer Turd Firefly, the guy is a troll who's singlehandedly hooverin up the Afghan sm**k supply it seems
158

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 10:41:16
#154 I can't see it stimulating spending either. I suspect that many businesses will just absorb the VAT cut and not pass it on to their customers. The £12 billion has to go somewhere and will be into business cash flow/profits. This should be seen in the context of other pre-budget changes that have clearly been brought in to assist SMEs:

* the deferred rise in the small companies' rate of corporation tax
* Empty properties with a rateable value under £15,000 will be exempt from business rates over 2009/10
* businesses being given more time to pay certain backdated business rates bills
* businesses being able to spread payment of their tax bills over an indefinite time period
* the Small Business Finance Scheme to support up to £1bn of bank lending
* the guarantee facility for up to £1bn of bank support to small exporters
* the £4bn of lending from the European Investment Bank between 2008 and 2011, with £1bn before the end of this year

Although we see the big job loss figures it is the 5, 10 and 20 jobs in these small to medium businesses that are the real reason for rising unemployment. Labour are trying to reduce the chances of mass layoffs due to these sorts of business closure. The VAT move, along with the SME-related measures above, has been done not only for economic reasons but for pure political survival.
159

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 10:41:31
OK then. Cancel the council tax freeze; abandon LIT; keep the council tax and watch the bills soar.

ps - Mad Dox - have you remembered to renew your membership to labour?
160

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 10:42:25
FEDS

Shouldn't you be working?
161

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 10:45:54
#163 They are allowed to comment about how the arrest was carried out not the actual reason for the arrest.

That being said, the comment came from Mr Green's own supporters and The Scotman, whilst reporting that, should not really have used it as the headline. It makes the paper look like a tabloid not a quality newspaper.
162

Queen D,

Glasgow 28/11/2008 10:46:25
I've just voted in the Scotsmans dodgy poll!
82% say independence damaged by the recession!
Porkies Scotsman!
Publish the results of the poll you chose to ignore on the desire for independence!
BTW Greenlanders have voted for greater autonomy from a very relaxed Denmark , did you know and choose to ignore it/ or not know because you have buried heads in sand??
English papers reported it!American papers and French papers, possibly Ozzie papers and even Outer Mongolia.
163

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 10:47:58
#167 I am but I also have a free time right now. Oh and the topic is actually related to my teaching specialisms - economics and business management. My employer has no problem with staff blogging if it helps improve their knowledge.

And, I have to say, it does.
164

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 10:49:13
170

You must have about 20 "free" periods going by the amount of time you're on here!
165

brownlie,

28/11/2008 10:50:42
168 The Fed

"It makes the paper look like a tabloid not a quality newspaper". Good to see you've retained a sense of humour despite trying to explain the Government's financial finagling!
166

Dunfesterin,

28/11/2008 10:52:02
RE: #170

See what I mean about public sector workers?



167

noswod,

Honestas 28/11/2008 10:54:53
Aye Money in from the Southern Britons £30bn, spending plans with give aways £33bn Gap = -£3bn. On dear the Southern Britons won't gizz us any mair cash. Margaret you were an elite bank trained economist wit dae we do ? Borrow money from ma mates oot near the airport. I canny do that because the Southern Britons have bought 58% stake in the bank and they say get stuffed. Aw the businessmen and the Councills are going monkeys o'er the new poll tax, they dinny like it. Wit are we going tae do ? The councills are also going ape because they canny increase the rates tae pay frae a the new geeaways we have thought of. What are we going tae do. The answer is to vote labour and restore the system where the Scots get the highest per capita public services spend in Brtain. Indepenence is grreat when you have been doon Stags bar on a Friday nicht but in the cold light of day the fate of Iceland awaits us if we vote for it.
168

Dunfesterin,

28/11/2008 10:58:03
#174:

"The answer is to vote labour and restore the system where the Scots get the highest per capita public services spend in Brtain."


What?!!! I'd rather be independent and poor than be rich and be a leech. Do principles not mean anything these days?
169

David MacVicar,

web 28/11/2008 10:58:51
The Federalist : "It makes the paper look like a tabloid not a quality newspaper."

LMAO - It abandoned any pretence of a quality years ago when they changed the format and audience from Unionist thinker to Unionist demersal.
170

alanh,

ek 28/11/2008 11:02:05
was this non story not in yesterday's addition?

Any chance the "journalist" could name the 23 councils and tell us the names of this group of 6 that they have brought out the cupboard?

is it just lazyness or does this paper have some sort of agenda against the current party in power?
171

,

28/11/2008 11:02:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
172

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 11:09:32
#177 The paper always has an agenda - and then it plays to it ad nauseam. Be it LIT, HBOS, trams or anything else it usually repeats similar stories from the usual suspects. In fact, if any story quotes the likes of Arthur "bleak" Midwinter, Lord Foulkes, Sir George Mathewson or Sir Peter Burt you can bet your bottom dolalr it is another re-hash.
173

Publius,

London 28/11/2008 11:09:48
P.S. to my #178

The government's got form on this. They used legislation designed to combat terrorism to seize control of the assets of an Icelandic bank.
174

Ghengis McCann,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 11:10:03
Ho hum. Another day, another stream of infantile dribble from CyberGnats blaming the messenger because they don't like the message. Their stock response to every criticism or question is to dismiss it all as a vast anti-Gnat conspiracy - a grassy knoll packed with hostile Unionist traitors.

It was always only a matter of time till voters looked behind KIng Smug's smoke and mirrors and started to follow the money. They are starting to see that Swinney and his pals aren't safe to left in charge of a child's piggy bank, far less a complex Scottish economy in recession. Salmond's constant bleating that he wouldn't have started from here - it wouldn't have happened in an independent Scotland - is not, apart from being an entirely spurious argument, putting cash back in anyone's purse. Mature politicians deal with the world as it really is, not as they would like it to be.

The Gnats are being found out for what they are - a single issue Ginger Group who luckily sneaked one more seat than Labour in the last election on a protest vote against deeply unpopular incumbents, and who now find themselves a political irrelevance. They are in office but not in power, unable to do more than indulge their fondness for grandstanding PR stunts and gesture politics. And there is no more cash in the biscuit tin for voter bribes like free hospital parking (well, sort of free).

Salmond is just a bully with a big gob, who is finding out that insults and shouting down opponents will not indefinitely get him out of aswering the hard questions. This would-be emperor really has no clothes.
175

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 11:10:57
#178 Thta's why I have resrved judgement until the full facts come to light.

There is more to this than meets the eye.

Toodle-pip - have to do some work now!!

;)
176

Miss H,

28/11/2008 11:10:57
140 It means what I said. If Westminster says that it will refuse to release funds which belong to Scotland because it disagrees with SNP policy it can, under present arrangements, do that.

Westminster can essentially do anything it likes to Scotland. The UK Government is the supreme authority. It has competence over everything and can over-rule the Scottsh Government and the Scottish Parliament at any time.

Don't tell me this comes as news to you. Surely not.



177

Miss H,

28/11/2008 11:13:01
181 What's a Ginger Group?
178

Miss H,

28/11/2008 11:14:40
181 Incidentally I apologise for not responding to your points. You clearly spent a lot of time and effort but it was all just too boring to read.

I would like to know what a Ginger Group is though.
179

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 11:23:50
Ginger group? His posts take the biscuit.
180

brownlie,

28/11/2008 11:25:23
181 Genghis

I would rather be associated with a single issue party than be associated with a system:

where invasion of another country, with the consequent death and desolation, was deceitfully sanctioned, totally against the wishes of the majority in this country.

where elected representatives ignore the wishes of their constituents whilst lining their own pockets.

where deception and corruption is not only condoned but encouraged.

where illegal practices are condoned and facilitated.

where thousands will die because of the government's determination to be seen as a "world power".

where the national debt has accelerated beyond belief.

where children and the elderly are left to die in poverty.

where following generations will be paying for the government's financial incompetence.

Would you like me to continue?
181

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 11:30:24
Ugly George (#64,#113) You know fine well what SM7531/2 was talking about so don't play silly b***ers.

Do you yourselves need reminding that for the next fiscal year, we will have a UK public sector deficit in excess of 8% of GDP, with the City forecasting a net increase in debt of at least £118 billion (the upper end of the Treasury forecast). Our public sector finances will not be back in balance (i.e. debt will not stop growing) until at least 2015/16, even if the rosy view of economic growth from 2010 is realsied.

SM7531/2 (incidently please get an easier moniker to remember!) is absolutely right to state that this debts will be spread over a lengthy period, hence borrowing £31 billion to prop up banks, especially when the treasury actually expects to make a profit on the bank recapitalisation by taking all dividends as preference share holders, and expects a quick repayment of its capital. It was, and still would be, eminently feasible for Scotland with a GDP in excess of £130 billion to borrow such a sum, especially if, as is planned, it was ultimately part of a currency union such as the Euro. Iceland's biggest problem, aside from being barred from borrowing due to UK designating it as a terrorist country, was its stand alone currency, which crashed and burned due to speculators.

The SNP do not propose to have a separate Scottish currency, but instead want to make the transition to the Euro, after a period of remaining in the Sterling currency zone. That would give confidence to capital markets.
182

Jimmy Le Pie,

28/11/2008 11:35:33
I see the Tory MP arrested last night (the one Comrade Broon claims to have no knowledge of!!) was actually arrested by anti-terrorist police!!!


Were they the same gun totting thugs that threatened journalists in Glenrothes??

Is this why Comrade Broon wants the 42 day rule??

Would ID cards have prevented this outrageous leaking of incompetence government??

Will the bomb squad arrest whoever leaked the PBR before the commons heard details??

Why was no one arrested over postal voting irregularities, and banged up without trial???





Mugabe would be proud of Comrade Broon!!
183

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 11:35:58
#122 - the really scary thought is that the £1.0 trillion national debt is just a headline figure. Add in PPP and public sector pension liabilities and we are talking well in excess of £1.5 trillion - perhaps as much as £1.8 trillion. In my area, the Council are planning to over 300 million over 25 years for 3 high schools that have a capital value of circa £70 million. This approach is being adopted aacross the land - buy now and pay later model promoted by Labour, Tories and Lib Dems. The SNP have shown already with Not for Profit models (even before SFT) and public funding of the Glasgow Southern, that they at least recognise that we must fund capital projects from within our means, or at leat TRY to find a lower cost way of borrowing, if Westminster let us.

Does anyone remember which Western European country was the last to go with the begging bowl to the IMF, prior to iceland this year. The United Kindom, in 1976. What saved us, was our ability to say we had oil revenues to underpin debt repayments. Are you unionist drones not able to see that with 25-30 billion barrels worth of potential oil taxation revenues for Scotland over the next 40 years, we would be in at least as good a position to prop up our two biggest banks as is the UK?

Remember too all those unionist muppets who said Scotland was too poor to be independent with a fiscal deficit on current expenditure in excess of 5%? Ironic, huh? Do the self same people now claim the UK is not viable? Of course not. Relatively speaking, there is a consensus that Scotland would be in surplus this year, if Independent and even with oil prices declining, its fiscal position would be stronger than that of the UK (we currently have lower unemployment, for example).
184

AJ Fife,

28/11/2008 11:46:38
Despite the usual anti-SNP spin from Maddox, isn't it great to see the nation governed by politicians who want a better deal for ordinary Scots?

This approach is obviously alien to unionists, who seem to prefer the Westminster-led rape of our country.
185

,

28/11/2008 11:48:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
186

English flag,

28/11/2008 11:51:22
Salmonds policies were distasterous from day one,pity it's took over a year for people to realise this.
187

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 11:54:10
188 Paul W
"It was, and still would be, eminently feasible for Scotland with a GDP in excess of £130 billion to borrow such a sum"

It would be if that was the only aspect of borrowing involved. That is what many do not appear to appreciate. The reality is that Scotland would have to accept a proportional share of UK national debt. You mentioned a figure of £1trillion. A pro rata amount for Scotland would be £85bn and the £31bn would have to added onto this to give £116bn. This is 110% of Scotland's GDP without oil and 90% of GDP with oil. These are both extremely high levels.

To put this into context the £1trillion for the UK is already seen to be far too high but this amounts to approx 70% of GDP.

There is also the issue of how reliable the Scottish GDP figure with oil would be considering that the price is volatile and production is falling. Loans taken out on the bond markets have life spans of up to 25 years. If oil production continues to fall at the present 7-9%, what will production be in 5,10,15 years time. So it is unlikely that the oil based GDP figure would be considered as a suitable figure for deciding that the loan could be paid back in future years.

188

English flag,

28/11/2008 11:55:41
AJ. At least he would have some reason for doing so.
189

Scotfree,

Erskine 28/11/2008 11:56:42
I doubt if anyone could seriously expect that the liberation of our people could be achieved through the reactionary institution such as The Group of Six or heaven forbid the an American owned paper such as the Scotsman (sic). In fairness to the members of the former organizations, since they have not been consulted on these matters and they have no mandate to discuss or negotiate on these matters we should take their leaders comments with a pinch of salt. The SNP on the other hand, has a mandate from the Scottish electorate and would be remiss not to bring forward these proposals and given the likely majority support in the Scottish parliament, the opposition of a one party controlled press on this is just another example of the moribund state of the Third Estate in Scotland.
Recent events show a more disturbing implication of the lack of a free press in Scotland. The Trotskyite (*) cabal currently in charge of the English government, in combination with a sympathetic (politically correct (sic)) police force and security service is working in unison with a one party press to advance the Labour parties one party state agenda. This was evident last year in the campaign against Tommy Sheridan with millions being spent on police investigating mini spirit bottles. More recently we had MI5/MI6 involvement in the theft and decryption of BNP membership details, on both accounts the press instead of questioning these activities sought to support the witch-hunt at the behest of the Labour regime. The other parties were silent on this, and the press collaboration therewith, presumably seeing these activities to their advantage in isolating opponents. This has emboldened the Labour Trotskyites and they have now used the security services and terrorist legislation to arrest and detain troublesome leaders of the conservative party. Let me predict that the SNP government will be next, either close to an election or prior to the imposition of the Trident Weapons system on Scotlan
190

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 11:57:51
#193 yes disasterous for those who want to suppress Scotland's aprirations for better governance and shaking off the dependency culture of Lanarkshire Labour and London Labour. Are you Gordon Brown, in fact? he seems to support England at footie and thinks Gazza's goal against Scotland in Euro 2006 is his favourite ever.
By the way, it is 18 months of SNp Government in Scotland, not a year. Doesn.t time fly when you are having fun!
191

Scotfree,

Erskine 28/11/2008 11:58:00
(cont)
This has emboldened the Labour Trotskyites and they have now used the security services and terrorist legislation to arrest and detain troublesome leaders of the conservative party. Let me predict that the SNP government will be next, either close to an election or prior to the imposition of the Trident Weapons system on Scotland, that arrests of key member of the Scottish cabinet are on the cards, with the full support of a one party press in Scotland. It is time for all parties in Scotland and those in the Labour party opposed to the Trotskyite cabal to demand a free Scottish press.

* The Trotskyites include have Alistair Darling as Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord (sic) Mandelson as Business Secretary and David Miliband as foreign secretary with his brother in the cabinet as Secretary of state for Climate and Energy -the Miliband brothers have a close connection to the early Soviet Cabinet through their grandfather Sam Miliband, a commissar in the Red Army who played a part in the mass starvation of 10 million peasant farmers in the red terror campaign in the Ukraine
192

English flag,

28/11/2008 11:59:42
Scotfree. The SNP on the other hand, has a mandate from the Scottish electorate

What mandate would that be then?
193

Jimmy Le Pie,

28/11/2008 12:00:56
#192 AJ Fife,

I've upset AM2 in the past.

I'm just waiting for my front door to be blown of its hinges by the polis (even though it's open!)
194

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 12:01:19
English flag,

"Salmonds policies were distasterous from day one,pity it's took over a year for people to realise this."

Oh dear. Here are the corrections:-

1. Salmond's (apostrophe) - not Salmonds.
2. Disastrous - not disasterous.
3. Full stop after "day one."
4. New sentence at "Pity." (Remember the capital letter).
5. It's took over a year - It's taken over a year.

Education, education, education.
195

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:02:49
Jimmy Le Pie. Don't you owe vimto £50!
196

Publius,

London 28/11/2008 12:03:29
#183 Miss H

You've still not responded to my point. I'll rephrase it.

We both know that Westminster will not release the 400 mill or so hitherto granted as council tax relief. Salmond and Swinney know that Holyrood will not get this money. Given this will the SNP still press on with LIT or abandon this policy?

Your first post stated that they will abandon the policy. You wrote: "The LIT is dependent on Westminster continuing to pay benefit to compensate for those whose incomes fall below the threshold at which they become liable for taxation. If Westminster refuses to do that then obviously the policy can’t happen."
197

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 12:04:51
#199 it is called winning an election. Winning the support of the Scottish parliament as First minister, and having your budget supported by the same parliament. To be fair to the Tories, they realised that to do otherwise would be anti-democratic, and they have sought to negotiate on areas of consensus with the Scottish Govt, as have the Greens and Margo, up to a point.

If you disagree with the above, remind me - did liebour gain a majority of the popular vote? No? Surely not - they can't have a madate to govern then, can they? The last Uk Govt to get an absolute majority of the vote was probably the Tories in 1955. Labour have never managed it - certainly not in Scotland at least.
198

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:05:59
Hugh Roscombe.I'm writing a comment on a newspaper thread not sitting "A" levels.
s-d off!
199

Jimmy Le Pie,

28/11/2008 12:07:34
English Flag

What £50 would that be??
200

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 12:07:44
Apologies for the typos - having to rush on my break.

201

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:09:40
Publius. Labour gained more than a 1 seat majority!
202

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 12:10:42
188 Paul W
PS
You mentioned the forecast annual UK deficit hitting 8% of GDP during the recession. Very high I agree but let us get some perspective on your claims. The scottish govt's own figures show that, before the recession (2006/07) the deficit in the scottish budget was £10.2bn (9.7% of GDP) if no oil revenues are allocated and £2.7bn (2.1% of GDP) with a geographical sahrae of oil revenues. At the same time the UK deficit was £31bn.

As you said the UK deficit is forecast to reach £118bn (a rise of £87bn) next year. According to the Scottish Govt, scotland receives 9.5% of UK govt spending and contributes 8.3% of revenues (without oil) So one has to expect the Scottish non oil deficit to rise by at least 9.5% of £87bn (8.3bn) to £18.5bn ( a massive 17% of GDP.) How would oil help. Forecast geographical sahre - 82.5% of £8.7bn = £7.2bn reducing deficit to £11.3bn. - still a huge 11% of GDP.

With these huge existing deficits how would the bond markets react to another £31bn bond issue not very
favourably.

Also there is no prospect of Scotland coming anywhere near the annual 3% of GDP deficit required by the stability pact for euro entry in the foreseeable future.

203

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 12:11:10
English flag,

"Hugh Roscombe.I'm writing a comment on a newspaper thread not sitting "A" levels. s-d off!"

Sorry kimba. I was only trying to help.
204

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:11:27
Jimmy Le Pie,something to do with a bet on who would win the Glenrothes by-election.
205

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:12:28
Hugh Roscombe. Who!
206

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:17:54
Jimmy Le Pie,Hugh Roscombe. Silence is golden,in your case it says it all.
207

Jimmy Le Pie,

28/11/2008 12:19:30
English Flag,

I think you are talking p!sh. I was outside the SNP office in Markinch on the Saturaday before the by-election - no Vimto

Are you VIMTO???

And as for your spelling and grammar, people should make allowances for the fact you are a complete moron!
208

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 12:22:52
#208

You are comparing a PR vote with FPTP elections - totally misleading.

Labour had a 66 seat majority. However they gained 55.2% of the seats with just 35.3% of the votes, in a system dominated by three parties. The Tories had 32% of votes and 30% of seats. hence labour only won due to the electoral bias built in to boundaries.

Not much different from the SNP share of votes last year (33% on const. and 31% on the list) in a four main party system, but that was a fair election based upon PR.

Do you really think Labour's mandate is any better than the SNP's? If so, you seriously need help my friend.
209

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 12:23:07
vimto, elizabeth the first, kimba, English Flag

Drone drone drone.
210

Guy Wersh,

eccy byde 28/11/2008 12:23:36
Does this paper only come out every other day or do they just reprint the same old crop again and again hoping to brainwash the readership?
211

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:23:57
Taxpayers will take a 57.9% stake in Royal Bank of Scotland after investors snubbed its £15 billion share offer, the bank has said. With a population of over 50 million England will take the lions share.
212

,

28/11/2008 12:26:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
213

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:26:25
Hugh Roscombe. Moron moron moron.
214

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:28:56
Hugh Roscombe. And you are a scottish t-wat,for which i will make allowances as you are clearly one of the snp brainwashed.
215

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:32:11
Jimmy Le Pie. No i'm not vimto,but as a work colleague i can assure you she kept the thread on which you made the bet,better pay up bucko!
216

G,

dndy 28/11/2008 12:33:57
Unbelievably delusional!

Some SNPites are suggesting that "the Group of Six" are Labourite stooges....the group of six are...."CBI Scotland, the Federation of Small Businesses, Institute of Directors, Scottish Council for Development and Industry, the Chambers of Commerce, and Scottish Financial Enterprise" - all well known Labourites....paranoid tartanoids.....
217

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 12:39:13
English flag,

"Jimmy Le Pie. No i'm not vimto,but as a work colleague.."

Does everybody at your work have a problem with basic English?
218

Miss H,

28/11/2008 12:40:14
223 No they are not Labourite stooges. They will of course use Labour to put pressure on the SNP - just as they used the SNP to put pressure on Labour when Labour were in office.

I don't object to that. Some of them of are pretty wealthy individuals and would pay more in LIT so if they want to complain about that then fair enough.

Wat is ridiculous however is to present them as demanding things and threatening to 'take the gloves off'. So let's imagine they take the gloves off - then what? Are they going to go on strike or what?

It's a bit of silly macho posturing from middle aged men who ought to know better.
219

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 12:40:24
223

G,dndy

I agree with you here G. I posted earlier that this group of six were attacking the chancellor in 2007.
220

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 12:41:20
#209 - shame you haven't read the David Hume Institute paper on fiscal models, i presume.

It showed that an INDEPENDENT Scotland (i.e. one with its territorial oil rights restored) would have had a 2.1% negative fiscal balance / deficit in 2006/07 and would be in absolute surplus in 2007/08. UK treasury has an oil price assumption of $60.1 per barrel for next year in the pre-Budget report. This is well below both what OPEC have set themselves as a target and what most Independent forecasts suggest is the medium term price (Oxford Economics have it at $80 per barrel, for example).

Anyway, get it right - Scotland's share of Total identifiable (i.e. in Scotland or by Scotland) and non-identifiable spend (debt interest, Defence (inc Trident, Iraq, Afghanistan) and foreign affairs is more than 9.0%. As you may be aware several of the revenue items and non-identifiable expenditure has been allocated to Scotland on a per capita basis. The Cuthberts uncovered many irregularities in previous reports, but there are many more to clear up.

To take on example - duty on spirits is levied at source, and more than 60% is distilled in Scotland. Scotland's allocated share of this is based upon its population share of less than 9%. Hardly fair, is it?

Government expenditure on Whitehall departments (almost all of which accrues to london and the South East) is recorded as being to the benefit of us all and we have to take a population share of that. While the income tax from all the workers on whom the money is spent is allocated to the South East, so we get none of that on the revenue side - perhaps we should get our population share of that two to partially offset costs.

On top of that, no one actually can tell us how much income tax Scotland generates and (b) how much corporation tax revenues come from Scotland - it is estimated based on population/ GDP shares.

Answer me this - how much of that 11% deficit is actually expenditure that would be needed if Sc
221

PaulW,

Ayton 28/11/2008 12:45:59
Important bit missing in my last posting -the bit after 9.0% should have read as follows: "foreign affairs is more than 9.0% in your analysis / GERS"

also bit cut off the end was as follows:

Answer me this - how much of that 11% deficit is actually expenditure that would be needed if Scotland was independent? I suspect a good share of it (E.g. on Trident, Iraq, Afghanistan) would not be as high - Afghanistan is perhaps more legit than the other two, but even so it would be far lower overall) and could be cut with no impact on Scottish services for Scottish taxpayers
222

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:46:11
Hugh Roscombe. Not as much as you do,that is quite obvious!
223

,

28/11/2008 12:46:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
224

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 12:47:38
Apologies for yet more typos - not a good day e.g. two/too, etc......

225

,

28/11/2008 12:48:37
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
226

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:49:53
So, as the taxpayer owns the majority of the RBS, guess we English should be cheering as we have gained another bank from scotland.
227

Miss H,

28/11/2008 12:52:33
190 The House of Commons Library says the UK’s future PFI payments amount to £181 billion for operational projects with a combined capital value of £57 billion.

That is the operational projects. I guess there are more in the pipeline.

Yet Labour and the Tories are defending it.
228

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:53:35
Mr. George Laird. George with the greatest respect stop talking cr=p.
229

,

28/11/2008 12:53:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
230

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 12:54:01
230 753.5
"If the bank is bailed out by an Independent Scottish government from the Scottish treasury or whether the money is borrowed to bail out the bank isnt the point. The point of course is its a decision which can be made in Scotland"

No it is not a decision made in Scotland. The option of borrowing is only an option if somebody is prepared to lend you the money. In this case the international bond markets. The point I have been making is that, on the back of already very large borrowing relative to GDP, the bond markets might well not accept another £31bn bond issue.

It is the same situation that would exist if you had a very large overdraft and made the "decision" to borrow more on it. The bank might say no so the decision is not yours to make.
231

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 12:54:24
234

UK bank toots.
232

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 12:56:58
The RBS took over Nat West.
233

,

28/11/2008 12:57:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
234

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:57:37
Hugh Roscombe. Ah, now it's a "UK" bank,up until the 57.9% take over by the government you classed it as a "scottish bank" funny how you change your tune!
235

Miss H,

28/11/2008 12:58:00
203 No we don't know any such thing. We know what various Labour politicians have said but we don't know what the Treasury will or will not do because they are not actually owned by the Labour Party. They go by the book, which says that CTB is part of Scotland;s budget.

If the UK Government wants to shift the goalposts on that they can do it but they will also pay a price for it.

Labour has thought all along that the SNP is bluffing on LIT. The SNP is not bluffing. What we don't know is whether Labour are bluffing.
236

English flag,

28/11/2008 12:58:58
Hugh Roscombe,and now we have it back!
237

,

28/11/2008 12:59:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
238

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 12:59:58
If the UK government bought 58% of the shares in RBS, it is in effect nationalised.

Funny old world though. RBS investors approved the bailout, but most declined to buy shares.
239

Nevsky,

Moscow 28/11/2008 13:00:02
240 George#

What an absolute load of dross you are talking. Everyone happy to lend the UK hundreds of billions but not Scotland £31 billion? Get a grip and talk some sense.

240

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 13:01:43
246

The UK has it back, but keep going with your racist posts kimba. You're a great advert for independence.
241

,

28/11/2008 13:01:47
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
242

Nevsky,

Moscow 28/11/2008 13:02:43
In fact Scotland would be a safer bet for international borrowing because we have a natural resource, oil.

England has nowt!
243

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 13:05:20
249 nevski
Once again you do not appear to read what I have actually written.

I said quite clearly in post 194 that it would be perfectly feasible for Scotland to borrow £31bn if that was the only item of borrowing.

The point I have made is that this would have to be added to existing borrowing commitments which are already at a high level of GDp and that cpould be a problem.

Once again you comment not on what I have said but what you imagine i ahve said. You keep doing this time after time as I have pointed out to you.

Please actually read what is there before you resort to insults.
244

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 13:05:42
I note that my posts at 19, 20, and 21 have been removed? The Scotsman can't take a little criticism - or is Millerman playing his old games?
245

,

28/11/2008 13:07:51
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
246

Alan B,

28/11/2008 13:08:15
At the end of the day an independent scotland would have just been a donald ducked as the whole uk if it had been run by Brown.

Bad economic management is bad economic management. The only difference with the uk is the debts are 10 times bigger.

On the other hand if AS the golden child had been at the helm then we would have been soaring like an eagle rather than plodding like turkeys at xmas.

247

English flag,

28/11/2008 13:09:09
Hugh Roscombe. As England makes up over three quarters of the UK,I suggest you lost the arguement a long time ago!
248

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 28/11/2008 13:10:43
254 - you seem to be saying that Scotland is skint and a bad credit risk ?

If that is true of Scotland (and it isn't) it would be doubly so of England, as they are the largest partner and carry a much higher debt.

Is England skint ?

On the story, it is just the usual rubbish which is printed in a number if different variables every day of the week.

It's groundhog day part 424, 425 tomorrow.
249

English flag,

28/11/2008 13:12:48
Observer. 1. You had better pray we are not, otherwise you will not be getting your 30 billion.
250

Alan B,

28/11/2008 13:13:30
#sm 7531/2

What UG is suggesting is Brown has recked the whole fiscal position of the the uk with massive debts. If an independenct scotland had been as badly managed and had run up proportionately as much debt as we have now within the uk then it would be difficult to get even more debt to bail out the bank.

On the other hand with a bit of competence we would never have mismanaged the economy so badly with such massive deficit levels.

251

Miss H,

28/11/2008 13:14:50
240 With respect your arguments are a bit pointless.

What has happened to Scottish banks has happened to Scottish banks operating in the UK not in an independent Scotland.

The collapse of the UK banking system is neither an argument for or against an independent Scotland. It's an argument that the UK economy has pretty big problems, yes, but it doesn't tell us anything about how an independent Scottish economy would perform or what position we would be in. I would hope if we were independent that we would not be in the position of having to bail out a failed banking system but if we were in that position I would hope we would recover in the same way that Sweden did.

As regards the arguments you made in 209 they have been answered in large part by PaulW.

The one point I would make is that if everything you said was true - that essentially Scotland was one of the worst performing economies in all of Europe can you not take on board the fact that the responsibiity for this lies with economic management from London.

Rather than suggesting we can't afford to go it alone, it suggests to me that we can't afford not to.
252

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 28/11/2008 13:15:03
260 go back to sleep.

Why are we not allowed to comment on the anti terrorist legislation being used against an MP who was assisting a whistleblower ?

That's bleedin' outrageous, this Government's Stalinist control freakery is Orwellian and pathological.
253

Nevsky,

Moscow 28/11/2008 13:15:07
254 George#

Unless you are actually speaking on behalf of those who 'lend' the money how in the he** can you qualify any of your statements.

All you are saying is that people might not lend money to Scotland if the borrowing was too high...so what the same could be said for any country in the world....complete waste of time making such a (non) point!

254

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 13:16:45
A bunch of unionist business men want to make policy and run the country. That may have been the way things were done under Labour, but those days are over.

(removed)
255

English flag,

28/11/2008 13:17:01
Alan B. In case you had not noticed the WHOLE world is in the same mess.
256

Alan B,

28/11/2008 13:17:54
#Ugly George

One of the reasons i think small western countries tend to do well economically is that they are more disciplined than larger countries due to economic necessity.

Big countries can get away will alot of bad economic practices for a long time before the brown stuff hits. Just look at the US. Other smaller countries which includes the big western european ones not be able to run such high debts and deficits.

In a similar way the uk can run bad economic practices for a while before reality hits.

So while i am sure you will think this is over optimistic the conclusion is we should go independent so that we can have better financial discipline.



257

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 13:18:25
259 Observer 1
Oh dear - another individual with an obvious lack of understandin of these matters. The whole point about measuring the degree of debt is to measure it against your income as a means of ascertaining how it can be repaid.

Yes England would be responsible for a much larger part of the debt as it is bigger but it also has a bigger income as it is bigger. That is why debt is measured as a percentage of GDP which is what I have done.


If you read what I have posted you will see that UK annual deficit is forecast to hit 8% of GDP. But using the same forecasts the proportionate debt for Scotland would hit 17% of GDP without oil revenues and 11% with them. All I have done is used figures issued by the Treasury and the scottish Govt.
258

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 28/11/2008 13:19:25
It's a pathetic argument that the Empire loyalists are making, that the UK's banking system went bust (because of unrestrained greed and deregulation under Labour's watch), and that proves that Scotland can't be independent. Eh ? That's a logical fallacy. The banks weren't being regulated by an independent Scottish regulator at the time they went bust.
259

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 13:19:53
Damian Green MP was arrested during a Stalinist type raid. I suppose we have to get used to this now that civil liberties have been trashed in the UK. I had hoped independence would have arrived before Broon's Police State was fully realized.

(removed)
260

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 13:20:32
#257 "On the other hand if AS the golden child had been at the helm then we would have been soaring like an eagle rather than plodding like turkeys at xmas."

That is sarcasm - isn't Alan?

I don't think anyone can seriously say what state an independent Scotland would be in - it would obviously depend on who was in power. That being said, I don't believe that the SNP, as it stands, are much different than Labour when it comes to fiscal policy. Both are clearly tax and spend parties.

There is a problem until one or more of our political parties seriously addresses the issue of Scotland's structural deficit, in particular, the issue of resource crowding out.

Introducing full fiscal autonomy would actually be a major step in forcing our politicians to seriously address the issue instead of playing pass-the-buck as at present.
261

Miss H,

28/11/2008 13:22:00
249 It remains to be seen how happy people are.

It remains to be seen if the UK economy will recover or go under.
262

Ugly George,

28/11/2008 13:23:40
264 nevski
"All you are saying is that people might not lend money to Scotland if the borrowing was too high...so what the same could be said for any country in the world....complete waste of time making such a (non) point!"

It is an obvious point I agree but some people on this thread seem to be unaware of it and that is why I have detailed how these things work so that they might gain some understanding of the matters.

The aspect about borrowing on the bond markets is that credit agencies rate national bonds on how well the country is able to repay them. If a bond gets a poor rating then investors either shun it or pay a very low price for it as it is seen to be risky.
263

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 13:23:41
Any debts incurrred to take over Scottish banks by English banks should be repudiated by an independent Scotland. If England wants our banks then they can pay for them.
264

brownlie,

28/11/2008 13:24:11
266 English flag

No - not many countries are in as big a mess as the United Kingdom - some countries are not in a mess at all.
265

Miss H,

28/11/2008 13:24:24
266 No, actually it isn't.

266

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 13:24:41
#267 The problems facing the emerging economies are to do with liquidity not the general health of these economies. Many of these countries are performing well in terms of growth, inflation and so on but have problems with high levels of personal and business debt.

These countries don't have access to the same levels of public sector borrowing as the economies of the the larger well-established nations - something you have pointed out before Alan. While the UK, USA, France etc can issue government bonds and gilts to cover their borrowing and bailouts of the private sector, these countries find that there is no buyer for their gilts and bonds. Therefore any attempt by their governments to bail out private sector debt is doomed to failure because ultimately the governments themselves will default - unless of course they go to the IMF, as they are doing now. Unfortunately we are seeing that the scale of the problem is such that the IMF does not have the wherewithal to finance such an amount - equivalent at least to the entire UK economy according to one estimate.

Although our economy has problems the one thing it does have going for it is that we still have sellable gilts and bonds - in some ways buyers are going for the brand name ahead of quality. It might not seem fair but it is the reality.
267

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 13:24:44
#258 English Flag

The UK collectively bought 57.9% of RBS. As England makes up around 48 million of the 60 million population of the UK, then you will find that England, at best, has around 46% of the stock in RBS. The rest would be Rest of Uk and private shareholders, many of which would be Scottish based investors, such as Life Assurance companies and small shareholders.

When the government shareholding is eventually sold off, the government will get its money back and it will own zero shares in RBS. The same situation would have been the case if a Scottish Government had been forced to bail out the bank.

However, would we have had the sh**ty FSA in an independent Scotland in any case? Probably not - especially not one run by adair turner and other new liebour luvvies. Scotland traditionally had a conservative banking culture, and the old Bank of Scotland was the epitomy of that, but bought into risk making when merged / taken over by Halifax and it went hell for leather for the mortgage market down south.

I tell you what - we will take the Scottish arm of RBS and what used to be the Bank of Scotland, and you can take Nat West and halifax back. Is that a deal?





268

English flag,

28/11/2008 13:25:56
Scunnert. We just have!
269

Alan B,

28/11/2008 13:26:24
#English flag

The whole world is not in the same mess. That is rubbish. The whole world is suffering from global economic problems largely caused by the US lending causing a collapse in the credit markets.

The uk also had silly lending like the US. Many other countries are effected by this downturn but are not in the same mess as the uk.

The art of a well managed economy is to be prepared to deal with global issues and downturns.

Many other european countries have not got our large personal debt levels caused main by an uncontrolled house price inflation. The reason the germans were blaming the anglo saxon economies for the current mess.

Many other european countries have not got the same deficit levels. That was because Brown broke his own golden rule for public fiscal policy and spend more money than was coming in during the good times.

Many other european countries do not have the same level of problems with their banking system. Largely because they did not have such a silly housing market. Those like iceland that do is due to their banks buying up too much sub prime US debt.

Did other european banks transfer mortgages to off shore charities (50billion in the case of nothern rock) to avoid fsa regulations, capital requirements and tax? Many of our banks are exposed due to this what should be criminal practice.

At the end of the day the imf and others are expecting the uk to suffer more than most. The reason sheer incompetence and negligence from brown.
270

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 28/11/2008 13:26:27
268 I hate to burst your bubble but two things you have left out your equation.

1, we don't actually know what the national debt is until PFI gets added onto the books next April.

2, we don't know how much more the government are going to have to borrow to spend their way out of this mess.

You are trying to project ahead and calculate what Scotland's share of the national debt is compared to our assets.

You can't actually do that with any degree of certainty.

But one thing is for sure, the longer we stay tied to Westminster, the worse the fiscal situation is going to get.

271

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 13:26:41
From The Times
November 28, 2008
Support for Gordon Brown plummets over economic rescue

Peter Riddell

Support for Gordon Brown as the right leader to deal with the recession has fallen sharply over the past fortnight, according to a special Populus poll for The Times. This shows that only just over a third of voters think that the Government’s measures to boost the economy will make things better in either the short or long term.
272

Ugly George,

28/11/2008 13:28:23
269
"The banks weren't being regulated by an independent Scottish regulator at the time they went bust"

Can you name anybody in scotland who called for tighter regulation on them before they went bust. Alex Salmond is on record as saying in 2007 that he wanted a "light touch" regulation on the banks and wanted to do away with some of the "gold-plated regulation" used by the FSA. He therefore felt that less regulation of the banks was appropriate. He has since backtracked on this by pretending he meant something different but he would-wouldn't he.
273

English flag,

28/11/2008 13:30:37
PaulW. You sound a little bilious,please remember the only reason RBS are in such a mess is because they bit off more than they could chew,it's as simple as that.
274

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 13:32:43
279 English flag, 28/11/2008 13:25:56

Not yet.
275

Nevsky,

Moscow 28/11/2008 13:33:57
283 George#

Once again stating what might what would and what could have been without the slightest ounce of fact to back it up.

The FACT is that the UK might well be forced to seem assistance from the IMF. This is a real possibility as you can't simple claw back an 8% defecit while going through a recession, the country is going into MORE debt.

If a run on the £ happens then that's it, the UK will be on the verge of bankruptcy! It is that bad.

Why do you rhink Broon was touting the Chinese to fill the IMF's coffers, he knows that the UK is teetering on the ede and if it happens, the UK will be the first major economy to fail!
276

Ugly George,

28/11/2008 13:34:59
281 Observer 1
Obviously I am projecting. In doing so I am using the current treasury forecasts. These may or not be accurate but the whole point is that these are the figures available and these are the figures that would be used by credit agencies such as Moodys and S&P to rate the bonds.

As far as PFI goes that obviously applies to both scotland and the rest of the UK. For some reason it is not considered in the type of analysis that is done.

"But one thing is for sure, the longer we stay tied to Westminster, the worse the fiscal situation is going to get."

Well that all depends on what a future govt would do. To make a fiscal position better in the short term you either have to cut spending or raise taxes. Which do you think should be done.
277

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 13:36:30
#262 "What has happened to Scottish banks has happened to Scottish banks operating in the UK not in an independent Scotland."

According to John Swinney, even after independence, it seems that we would still have regulation carried out by the Financial Services Authority.

Salmond has argued that the SNP would have regulated far more tightly but the evidence seems to be lacking. Ignoring the issue of who would be the regulator, it seems, if one considers his previous statements regards attracting financial institutions to a post-independence Scotland, that a post-independent Scotland would either have the same regulation as the rest of the UK or even less regulation.
278

English flag,

28/11/2008 13:36:40
Scunnert. You had better pray that they do work otherwise you,me,our children and our childrens children will be paying for a long time!
279

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 13:36:45
283 Ugly George, 28/11/2008 13:28:23

The regulation of the economy is a reserved power. With power comes responcibility. Of course Labour doesn't understand that concept.
280

Alan B,

28/11/2008 13:37:41
#The Fed

I was not talking so much about emerging economies rather than the small western european ones.

I was more getting at if a small country borrowed excessively pre euro then there currency would be hit hard. That type of thing enforces discipline.

So while the post was abit hammed up it was generally saying that being small tends to force government to be more aware of economic realities than bigger countries can to some extent hide from for a while until reality bites.

Germany who performed the best of the big countries until unification was probably as a result of having better economic discipline. The US created germany in its image being federal with an independent central bank. (japan after ww2 was also had an independent central bank). Germany ran tight anti inflationary policies partly as a reaction to the hyperinflation of the 30s and ran tightish fiscal positions and invested alot.

Whereas the uk ran a poor monetary policy with inflationary booms and bust as a result of interest rates being an election weapon of government and not sensible economic policy. Fiscal policy in the uk post ww2 was also about consumption and not investment.

From a scottish point of view we simply would not have been able to keep such inefficent industry afloat like the uk in the 70s and would have had to reform much earlier without letting the situation get so bad.
281

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 13:38:44
289 English flag, 28/11/2008 13:36:40

No thanks. I think Scotland can safely repudiate any debts incurred to finance a raid on Scottish Financial Institutions. You want the bank? Pat for it.
282

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 13:39:30
Public 'losing confidence in Brown' over economy

By Andrew Woodcock, Press Association Chief Political Correspondent
Friday, 28 November 2008

Public confidence in Gordon Brown as the best leader to deal with the economic crisis has fallen sharply, according to a poll carried out in the wake of his tax-cut package to haul Britain out of recession.
283

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 28/11/2008 13:41:06
287 I am not at all sure that it is a straight choice between raising taxes or cutting spending.

And me, I'd start off with nationalising the banks, which would put us in a very different position.

But that is at a tangent from the thread ('though you did ask(.
284

Astonished,

inverclyde 28/11/2008 13:41:52
Could I remind everyone that Gordon will send the polis round for heinous crimes like telling the truth, holding labour to account and leaking documents that reveal labour are a bunch of numpties.

Because of Gordon and labour (and no one else !) we are falling into the abyss :-the only answer is independence - this is dawning on more and more folk.

Finally I leave with a joke :

Why does the "Grim Reaper" hate going to Glenrothes ?



He always has to wait until they fill in their postal vote !


I THHHHHHAAAANNNKKK YOOOOUUUU!
285

English flag,

28/11/2008 13:42:16
Nevsky. And that would make your day,you sad excuse for a human being,as a British subject you should lend your support.
286

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 13:42:29
#284 English flag. Resorting to insults doesn't make your argument any stronger.

If anyone is indeed "bilious" or bad tempered, my friend, it is you.

I think it also ludicrous to suggest that the UK Government, which separated regulation from the bank of England, has no blame for the failure to regulate RBS, Northern Rock, HBOS, Bradford and Bingley, etc. That smacks of a failure to regulate which almost led to systemic failure of the UK banking sector.

Who had oversight of the borrowings of the Uk banks and their deteriorating balance sheets and capital ratios? Why did the regulatory body not intervene to prevent loss of value for shareholders (many of which are our pension funds).

UK Govt failed to protect the Equitable Life members too. they have form.

Fred the Shred did make mistakes, as he has admitted, but the regulator is there to protect us from these mistakes. Adair Turner, a well kent labour luvvie, was at the helm.

287

Miss H,

28/11/2008 13:42:46
268 You also miss the point though.

If we accept your figures, all that it tells us is that Scotland as a region of the UK is expected to have an annual deficit of 11%.

It does not tell us what the level of annual deficit would be of an independent Scotland. We do not know.

Can you not see the logical fallacy in citing evidence of how poorly the Scottish economy fares within the UK as an argument against independence?

Logically it would make sense for Scotland to remain in the UK if we did particularly well within the Union. Not if we did quite badly.
288

Sumlogic,

Scotland 28/11/2008 13:43:37
As usual blame the SNP government for everything...

Firstly - No 1- Rufus T. Firefly. Give it a try, there is plenty of room. Then list the names of ALL the people in Scotland who are in favour of the idea.

Secondly - No 6 Millerman1..."this part of the UK" you appear to be unable to even write the name of the place you speak so despairingly of...SCOTLAND.

The truth of course is very likely the opposite, Scotland as an Independent nation may seriously rattle the cages of the Southern control freaks and some may even move north... We 'may' likely never know thanks to continual hogwash and scaremongering by Unionists and their affiliated Rags passing off as News outlets.

As for LIT, yes it has problems, but what taxation system does not...The people seem to want it judging by the polls...As for Councils wanting more money, well there is no end to that. Make them work harder for a change, and sack all of the dead wood.

Councils, just like many other non profit organisations (NHS) etc have an excellent ability to SPEND money...How about saving and cost cutting for a change, starting, not with services but with overstaffing, theft, idleness, unnecessary overtime, incompetence, pie in the sky projects (IT especially), duplicated systems, trips here and there, free bars etc Ad infinitum.
289

Ugly George,

28/11/2008 13:45:27
286 Nevski
"Once again stating what might what would and what could have been without the slightest ounce of fact to back it up."

Once again you have not read what I have written. I have stated that I have used Scottish govt. figures and treasury forecasts. There is no mystery about that. These are the figures available. What do you expect somebody to do - make up their own.

"The FACT is that the UK might well be forced to seem assistance from the IMF. This is a real possibility as you can't simple claw back an 8% defecit while going through a recession, the country is going into MORE debt.

If a run on the £ happens then that's it, the UK will be on the verge of bankruptcy! It is that bad."

This really is bizarre. I have, as I stated, used treasury forecasts and you have accused my analysis of having nothing to "back it up" yet used have used those same forecasts in quotiing the figure of 8%

Also, once again you have imagined a point and assumed that I have made it. I have said nothing here to defend Gordon Brown's handling of the economy and I am indeed critical of it. You appear to assume that I am defending it. The point I have made is that if you use the current Treasury forecasts (which you are happy to do) and existing figures from the Scottish govt the relative picture for Scotland looks even worse.

What point were you trying to make?


290

Alan B,

28/11/2008 13:47:55
#Ugly George

It is very difficult to predict how scottish banks would have shaped themselves had we been independent and in many ways as you know it is now irrelevent.

First of all it would depend when we went independent and what government we get to manage scottish affairs.

If we had gone independent in the 70s would we have had the deregulation of the 80s?

Would we have had the mergers and takeover with the english banks?

Would we also have allowed such dodgy offshore practices like the Granite fiasco that other banks have involved themselves in?

The banks are in trouble due to overdependency on the credit markets which asks 2 questions.
1)would we have regulated to prevent this over exposure
(maybe, maybe no)
2)what caused the overexpose: rapid personal debt caused be massive house price inflation - would we have stopped that. I would like to think so for a variety of reasons. Partly due to scotland being more anti debt than england till more recently and also due to the fact that scotland has no reason for shortage of supply.

Off course scottish banks exposed to the english market would have then got the high levels of english personal debt to contend with.

I also think the banks would have been structured differently if we had been independent if the mergers, takeovers had gone ahead. Personally i would have been pro a more restrictive takeover policy of scottish companies and i think that is like to have been the prevailing view. But if the mergers had gone ahead I think the banks would have been structured differently with a holding company operating 2 banks an english one and scottish. As such any bail out would be for the much smaller scottish one.
291

English flag,

28/11/2008 13:48:03
Scunnert. Sorry, you,and everyone else in scotland will have to pay their fair share.
292

Ugly George,

28/11/2008 13:49:41
294 Observer 1
"I am not at all sure that it is a straight choice between raising taxes or cutting spending."

I can't see any other way of reducing a deficit in the short term. Over the long term people consider that a growing economy leads to rising tax revenues but this takes years to make a significant difference. Also it assumes growth and we are in a recession.

293

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 13:51:09
302 English flag, 28/11/2008 13:48:03

We already have EF - already have.
294

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 28/11/2008 13:52:13
303 you are assuming that economic growth is a good thing. I would argue that it is not, and that is part of the reason we are in this mess.

Now may be a good time to re-evaluate what kind of economy we can sustain. But that is way off topic.
295

Reiver,

Galashiels 28/11/2008 13:54:20
Well the daily mail readers are certainly piling in here to show off their well researched education ... it's interesting to note that the ability to comment on the story above is totally ignored and the ranting, raving natz supporters carry on oblivious to the reality around them.
296

Ugly George,

28/11/2008 13:54:29
301 Alan B
I agree that it is difficult to ascertain what might have been. But the Scottish banks might well have followed the path of the Irish Banks. They attempted the light touch regulation and moved into the UK property market. Personally I feel that the most likely outcome would have been a feeling that Scottish banks have to compete with Irish and English banks and can't afford to have tighter regulations.
297

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 13:55:43
This thread is so much twaddle. Here's what the clowns at CBI really want:

The latest from CBI Scotland


Boosting business during downturn
CBI Scotland has published its recommendations for changing the Scottish government’s spending plans to give a much-needed boost to firms and the economy. The 15-point plan is a response to the request from cabinet finance secretaryJohn Swinney for feedback on the Scottish government’s Draft Budget for 2009/10. Our blueprint calls on ministers and MSPs to deliver reforms and investments across key policy areas, including taking further action to accelerate infrastructure projects, enhancing the range of services the public sector buys from the private sector, privatising Scottish Water – which in future years would release £180m annually for spending on GDP-enhancing investment – and scrapping plans for a local income tax, saving £20m in start-up costs. For further details of this response, please contact david.lonsdale@cbi.org.uk

tinyurl.com/6372ky
298

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 13:57:02
Aye - they want to privatise everything and then make the public pay for it.
299

English flag,

28/11/2008 13:57:07
PaulW. Funny how you blame anything and everything except the British public,we all thought we could borrow way beyond our means,it has caught up with us and now we go whingeing to the government to bail us out.
300

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 28/11/2008 13:58:02
''enhancing the range of services the public sector buys from the private sector''
Wot ? Like PFI ? Ha ha ha.

Aye you are right Scunnert, this is a load of twaddle.
301

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 13:58:56
305 Observer. 1, Glasgow 28/11/2008 13:52:13

That is a heresy. But true.
302

Scunnert,

28/11/2008 14:00:37
Ah'm aff.
303

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 14:02:45
290 scunnert
"The regulation of the economy is a reserved power. With power comes responcibility."

Indeed so but how would this power and responsibility have been used. With English and Irish banks making substantial profits and expanding as they were up to a year or so ago, would the Scottish govt have restricted Scottish banks with tighter regulation. The clamour from the banks would have been that Scotland needs to develop its economy and we can't do that if we are at a competitive disadvantage to Irish and English (or Icelandic for that matter) banks.

As I said nobody in Scotland called for tighter regulation before this yet so many seem to assume that Scotland would have had tighter regulation. I think that this is just being wise after the event.
304

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 14:02:56
#300

george - only if you assume that the additional costs are spread according to population.

ITEM Club says the London economy is set to see GVA potentially contract by as much as 3.8%. Scotland (bad enough) may see GVA contract by less than 1%. For whom will the additional expenditure on benefits be incurred and at whom is the fiscal stimulus being targeted. Scotch Whisky was one sector that was potentially going to increase its fiscal contribution before Darling admitted to an error.

How sure are you that Scotland would have 11% deficit after oil in those circumstances?
305

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 14:05:42
306 Reiver

Eh? You think English flag posts sense? Away with you sonny.
306

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 14:06:08
Bye.
307

Alan B,

28/11/2008 14:06:37
#Ugly George

I am generally quite pro light regulation anyway.

But would tackle it from the other persepective of controlling personal debt and house price inflation by have quantitive control of the money supply to prevent house prices and hence debt going through the roof.

I am not against buy to let but not it should have been done much more prudently. Mortages should never been allowed when greater than the value of the property. Stricker control round liar mortages (self certifiation). Ratios to income for mortgages.

I would use quantitive measures so not to push interest rates too high by using the cost of credit to control money supply.

I would also like to see controls over the pushing of loans and debt all these adverts for loans etc.

Where i would have liked banks to be regulated is to prevent them avoiding capital requirements and fsa regulations using these dodgy off shore charity mechanisms.

One thing the US did was have a clear divide of commerical investment banking and high street depositor banking. (brought in in the 30s). It means higher risk banks do not bring down the high street ones.

So i would suggest 2 things:
1)regulate so that we have banks that lend based on the credit markets and banks that lend based on deposits. they can be different limited companies within the same group and that would mean that one would not bring down the other. NR for other reasons held some of its mortages in other companies or organisations.
2) if scotland was independent encourage a structure so that a scottish bank that take over an english one does so keeping the trading bank in england as a separate legal entity. As such any bankruptcy of the bank would mean that a scottish government would only need to bail out the scottish end.

308

Observer. 1,

28/11/2008 14:07:47
314 - we are all being wise after the event. Well, apart from those of us who were wise before it, and we were a tiny minority.

But we are where we are, there is no point in backdated speculation. It is where we go from here that counts, and I think we are better navigating our own ship from now on.
309

Ugly George,

edinburgh 28/11/2008 14:07:59
305 Observer 1
"you are assuming that economic growth is a good thing. I would argue that it is not, and that is part of the reason we are in this mess."

If you do not have economic growth how do you get the resources to improve things like the Health Service. Does the health service stay at its present level. if so how do you pay for expensive new equipment/drugs that can save peoples lives and how do you cope with an ageing population.
310

Jimmy Le Pie,

28/11/2008 14:11:10
Had enough.

Off to St Andrews to celebrate St Andrews Day.

Have a good weekend.

Saor Alba
311

Publius,

London 28/11/2008 14:12:57
#295 Astonished

You write "Could I remind everyone that Gordon will send the polis round for heinous crimes like telling the truth, holding labour to account and leaking documents that reveal labour are a bunch of numpties."

What is terrible is that you may be right. Anti-terrorism laws and police have already been used against an Icelandic bank and a Tory politician.

Ah weel. I'm now off up the motorway and Dumfries to Girvan for the weekend. Last weekend I met a lassie who works at the distillery while we were shopping in Asda. This weekend I'm hoping for some fiscal stimulus.
I'll catch up with you all later, folks.
312

Alan B,

28/11/2008 14:18:07
#320 Ugly George

I think there is serious discussion to have about a post capitalist economy and society. Like anything it is about evolution and we are so entrenched in the current system.

We have gone from an argiculuture economy to industrial. Now we are in a post industrial service economy.

But at some point you have to ask what is the point. Why do we spend so much of our lives working and then spending it on rubbish and not having considerably more time for our own lives.

Is this whole economy about social control. The idea it is good to work.

The nu autocractic left is into so much control over the work place that prevents flexible working. Against temps etc.

But more of the middle classes are rebelling against that and are working more part time or on their own terms. Maybe not so much in scotland where the fear issue is played so well.

The great social control recently was house prices. Create this ever spiraling house price thing and we all have to work to buy a house and work for donkeys to pay it off.

Lets face it buy your house and have some scatter cash and you would be better off playing golf :).
313

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 14:24:27
315 Paul W
Indeed there could some variations in different places in the amount of revenue increasing or decreasing but this is unlikely to make a huge difference to the relative economies in just one year. These may involve adjustments but I can't see how thay could dramatically alter the picture. You have stated that scottish GDP or GVA may contract by less than 1% but the total UK economy is forecast to contract by 0.75- 1.25%

The hit to the London economy is as a result of the financial services industries being hit hard so relative to the UK it will contract more. But the effect is likely to be the same in Scotland with Edinburgh's financial services industry resulting in its contraction being greater than the rest of Scotland. All we can do is go on the forecasts and the forecasts are very similar.

Also it is a misconception that the duty on alcohol is paid by producers like the whisky industry. It is paid by the consumer. The industry merely collects it and passes it on. Who pays your income tax - you or your tax inspector - its the same thing.
314

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 14:26:14
#318 It's easy to say with hindsight, as the SNP are attempting to do, that they would have regulated differently.

The evidence seems to me to be the opposite - that they would have had either the same regulatory system as the UK or an even looser regulatory regime.

Apart from stopping short-selling, there is no other evidence at all that the SNP were propsing a tighter regulatory regime.

In fact one could go further and say that no political party, not the Tories, the Lib Dems or the SNP, were proposing economic policies that were fundamentally different from Labour's. For example, the Tories advocated the same spending plans as Labour at the last two elections. I find it hard to convince believe that they would have done anything fundamentally different.

The few voices who did warn about the credit bubble and house price inflation were not in the political parties - because it is not a vote winner to tell the electorate that they were going to slow/cut public spending or slow down house price rises.

315

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 14:30:37
#326 Col Blimp.

Spot on - and all PPP has to be on balance sheet from April. Wonder if that means GB will go for an election in March before taxpayers notice that they shafted the public finances for the next two generations.

If they leave it to 2010, this will be a well known fact..........and Gordon brown will be known as the destroyer fo the UK economy and not the saviour of the World one!

316

Edward,

28/11/2008 14:30:58
See were notallowed to comment on the arrest of an opposition politician - Zimbabwe? No, its a UK opposition minister by the anti terrorist squad, held for 9 hours - his crime? Trying to reveal information related to crime and the amount of immigrants working in the home office. Apparently Labour were trying to keep it quite, so had the civil servant and the politician arrested on trumpted up charges, being breaking the official secrets act and terrorism
Th go ahead would have come with the approval of a minister at least, but Labour ministers are denying everything
317

Edward,

28/11/2008 14:33:24
Why cant we comment on th 'Fraud in Aberdeen' story??
Scotsman trying to lay blame with aid of the Labour creeps at the door of the SNP and Libdems. Problem is if it is Fraud it goes back to a period before they took charge of Aberdeen and found that it was broke!
318

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 14:37:56
#328

Actually, ITEM Club says that Scotland's economy will only contract by 0.4%. In other words, London may contract 10 times as quickly. hence, if the stimulus is intended to help anywhere (and capital projects etc) it is likely to be targeted where it is needed. Hence, I think that Scotland's economy will not receive as big a share of that stimulus. Why would we be held accountable for that debt, when it deosn't benefit us? hence how can you be sure that 11% as % of GDP is indeed the correct net figure for Scotland?

319

Alan B,

28/11/2008 14:39:00
#The Federalist

I do not have a clue what the snp would have done.

I am just saying what i would have done.

While some might be hindsight now most is not. Controlling house price inflation is something i would have done from the start. We should have learned that lesson from the negative equity of the 90s.

I was under the impression banks were regulated to ensure capital requirements. Remember my accountancy teacher at school (must have been mid 80s) saying they was requirements for banks to have certain gearing.

Most of my views on what should have been done would have been from a british persective as that is the economy we are in.

Controlling credit and the money supply is the core to the way i would manage an economy. Not strict monetarism Friedman style but would take account of that philosophy to a large degree.

I believe in quite light regualation but that does not mean the dodgy offshore practices we have seen. It is as you know abit irrelevent to go back and suggest what scotlands position would have been independent. But it is very possible we would not have had the thatcherite deregulation. Not that i was against it.

But lets face it was are having this discussion becuase unionist say scotland could not cope with this crisis. And nats hit back and say we would not been in this situation. Noone knows and it is irrelevent as we are in the mess now.
320

Findlay Thompson,

28/11/2008 14:41:15
Why have all comments on yesterdays issue "SNP under fire on tax & Schools" been removed?

321

The Master,

28/11/2008 14:41:53
#323 Priest: you're clutching at straws here.
everyone in a household earning a wage would be liable for the new tax, instead of one bill covering the home. That's a great deal of discontent against that the Nats will be building up.

What poll tax 2 has in common with its predecessor is that it will create many losers: I personally feel that the tax will scupper nationalism faster than anything (if it ever sees the light of day!)

Indeed, I've read rumours that Cameron's ready to cave in to Nationalist demands that the CT rebate should remain, just so that the Nats can be allowed to fall into the classic trap of trying to tamper with the traditional British way of financing local services.
322

Ugly George,

28/11/2008 14:42:19
315 paulW
PS
You might well find that the recession is slightly less severe in scotland as Scotland has a higher proportion of public sector workers many of whom are immune to the effects of a recession.

But the corollary of this is that once growth starts again (assuming it does) is that the revovery tends to be less pronounced in Scotland. That has been the patter over the last 20 or so years.
323

The Master,

28/11/2008 14:44:06
#336: what would you do if, as a moderator, you were confronted with screeds of chippy nationalist bile?
324

Alan B,

28/11/2008 14:47:14
#The Federalist

I think the tories would have run a different fiscal policy to labour. But they did 2 things:

1)accepted labours overspending to get elected, and then in the fulness of time would reduce the ratio of public expenditure.

There is no way right wingers like IDS, Hague etc would have run big public sectors after they got elected.

Abit like brown in reverse. He kept to tory promises over spending to get economic credibility. Then when in power let it rip.

2)The tories to some extent learned from blair. Do not tell the electrate what you would do. That does not mean they would do the same as labour.


From a monetary policy and house prices it is more difficult to tell.

1)tory monetary policy was poor for thatchers time
2)clarke was running a lax monetary policy when brown took over. The boe who took control of interest rates immediately raised them by 1%.
3)But the tories did include housing costs in the inflation measure and as such would have been targetted somewhat.
4)depends on which tory leader and chancellor. If it was a thatcherite then they may have been more dragonan on inflation. They may have run a pure monetarism economy by targetting the growth of credit using interest rates.

At the end of the day we do not know. But what we do know is they were not particularly vocal about critising brown. Though when they did over him breaking his golden rule the press did not run with it and the public who were happy with the boom and were clueless about economics were not listening.
325

Alan B,

28/11/2008 14:50:09
#The Master

That thread was not bad yesterday and quite interesting. I did not see anything offensive before it was pulled.
326

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 14:52:27
Fair enough, George. However, GERS actually provides data to suggest Scotland's public sector spend (total managed Expenditure) as a % of oil GDP (based on 82.5%) is below that for the UK. Scotland is less exposed to financial services, especially investment banking, than is London.

However, you haven't dealt with the issue I raised - how can you be sure that Scotland's deficit as % of GDP would be 11%?

I understand the nature of the point you were making, but surely you must accept the possibility that it could be lower or at least no worse than that for Rest of UK at this time, especially as Scotland did badly out of the last comprehensive spending review, with its infamously stingy increase for Scotland in 2007/08?

Much of the recent fiscal expansion in England and Wales ahs been made in such a way as to avoid barnett altogether, so I would contend that Scotland will not be seeing

Also is what you state were true, re public sector, our tax base will not erode as quickly as elsewhere and esepcially London.
327

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 14:56:19
the Master

Most of the bile (see English Flag) has been from the Unionists.

See all the offensive comments about Alex Salmond and so forth, when he is not here to defend himself.


328

Alan B,

28/11/2008 14:59:36
#PaulW

There was nothing i could see that was offensive yesterday (not more than normal).

However i have noticed the scotsman does pull the comments section if the nats are dominent in that thread as it goes against the editorial policy of the scotsman to be pro labour and pro union.
329

PC Caledonia,

28/11/2008 15:00:03
The Master,28/11/2008 14:44:06

I have the comments preserved in an RSS feed.

They are less provocative and offensive than most of the current #1 in-house troll's rants.

Johnston Press pretends that the comments are un-moderated except through users making "Report Unsuitable" objections. This is clearly not the case so JP is fully accountable for all of the "in-crowd" nonsense that is allowed to remain on the threads.

If the comments are to be moderated then it should be done in a consistent manner.

People are libelled and defamed on these threads every day and it is getting out of hand.

No doubt this comment will be "Removed by Administrator" with no "Reason" given.
330

TWC,

28/11/2008 15:02:06
The facts on this are simple; Council Tax is finished, unless there is a better proposal, LIT(in some form) will be implemented. I hope the parties at holyrood combine to define the best proposal they can
We cannot go on with the Barnett pocket money policy, we must have Fiscal Autonomy with some agreement on what can be reserved / shared and how much we are willing to pay for it. Or we can have independence.

New Labour don't have any proposals so they are stuffed. Westminster Labour are found out to be absolutely useless AGAIN as they were every other time they have been in power.
We need to do it for ourselves and if the oil is not a big factor, let's leave it in the ground till it is.

Sheik Yamani in the 70s asked "what can I invest in that is a better investment and grows more than oil in the ground" --Nothining!
so Britain you should burn your coal and leave our oil alone.
331

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 15:12:21
#326 Thanks for the mention.

Actually there are a number of issues regards using National Debt as a % of GDP as a measure to compare countries.

Firstly, there is no internationally accepted measure - how the UK, the US, Japan or any other country calculates National Debt varies from country to country. In fact, when we refer to the National Debt for the UK we are actually refering to the Public Sector Net Debt. HM Treasury has an excellent 5-page booklet that gives a short explanation of how public sector debt is measured (http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/55(1).pdf). There are good reasons why some things are included and others are not - and I have explained that elsewhere. What really matters though is that we are comparing like with like - and right now - we are not.

Secondly, comparing National Debt to GDP is like comparing apples with elephants. It is like the profligate son comapring himself to his more prudent father - rather meaningless.
332

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 15:13:50
#340 "But what we do know is they were not particularly vocal about critising brown."

Precisely the point I am making.
333

The Master,

28/11/2008 15:13:55
#342: English Flag does have a valid viewpoint. Do not be put off by the semi satirical style. To quote Alf Garnett: "listen and you might learn something".
334

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

28/11/2008 15:20:03
#342 One of the reasons Scotland may ride out this recession better than previous recessions is that much of our manufacturing base has already gone. The public sector plays a greater role in propping up employment levels. That might be fine in the short-run but in the long-run is not good for the Scottish economy. No matter if there is independence or not, whosever is in power needs to tackle the issue of our structural deficit, particularly in the are of resource crowding out.
335

Ghengis McCann,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 15:21:36
#288 - "Salmond has argued that the SNP would have regulated far more tightly but the evidence seems to be lacking"

Too right, the evidence is lacking. Anyone hear Salmond calling for greater financial regulation before the recession? Indeed anyone hear Salmond even predicting a recession?

That is because he wasn't - he was too busy breakfasting with big business and trying to persuade multinationals to come and make their bucks in Scotland. He wanted to make an independent Scotland part of the arc of prosperity along with Iceland and Ireland - given that our banks were, in his stated opinion, all sound as pounds.

The guy has been tried and found wanting at almost every stage of the current crisis. He opens his mouth and rumbles. He has only two gears - he either shifts the blame on to Westminster or says that he wouldn't have started from here. He simply has no answers to any of the hard questions.

Yet the CyberGnats still dribble on with their dystopian version of reality.
336

Jimmy Le Pie,

28/11/2008 15:22:26
#349

You and English flag should heed the old Scottish proverb

"If you've nothing intelligent to say, say nothing".
337

Calvinist,

28/11/2008 15:22:27
ah yes, Histrionic Disconcordat,

It was all pompous twaddle from the start.
338

The Master,

28/11/2008 15:26:28
#352: what a succint summation of my objection to the so called case for separatism. Beyond "songs and heroes", there just isn't one: ever heard of "The Emperor's New Clothes"?
339

Alan B,

28/11/2008 15:36:00
#Ghengis

I think it is daft to try to blame Salmond in this way.

Brown ran the economy into the ground with the most ridiculous level of incompetence.

That Brown was incompetent in his economic management does not mean other leaders of other parties would be. At the end of the day you can only judge the person in power and he has failed us very badly.

Part of the issue is the problems are not really ideological. Brown said he would run the economy prudently and in a stable manor. He underpinned that with his golden rule not to borrow over the economic cycle.

Lets face it he pretty much lied.

It is not surprising the opposition do not critise the golden rule as it had many merits. It is not opposition politicians fault if the leader of the country and the economy break their own publicly stated economic rules.

Alot of people have been going on about the level of personal indebtedness in the economy. Again the blame lies at browns door.

At the end of the day Salmond has been very critical of the uk economic management of the scottish economy. That is why he is in the snp and lead them.

In seriousness though one problem for the opposition politicians including the tories is it is hard to critise the government at the time until things start going wrong. Salmond an economist is not stupid enough to think if he talks dryly about the economy in a level of detail which an economist will go into, that it will light up the eyes of the electrate.
340

TWC,

28/11/2008 15:39:29
354 The Master,

ever heard of "The Emperor's New Clothes"? yes that was brown's economics policies.

Let's get control of the money we can't possibly do worse than Labour -- every time they are in Government it ends in financial Disaster.

The Mantra of --
Boom Or Bust, it won't affect the pond in your pocket

Is now It's Global,US Problem, working families, Can't do nothing

Brown like many of the posters on here is deluded, he'll end up with tie up sleeves in a special cell.
341

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 15:40:24
#352 and #349

Jimmie - you are absolutely right. there is a Gaelic saying which I once saw translated.

“Far an taine ‘n abhainn, ‘s ann as mò a fuaim.”
Which translates as: “Where the stream is shallowest, it is noisiest.” That sums up Dufus, English Flag, AM squared, etc.

Extraordinary that someone should actually quote Alf Garnett and expect to be taken seriously. The day I listen to Alf Garnett and his ilk and feel like I have learned something (other than what prejudice sounds like) is the day that hell freezes over. The character of Alf Garnett and his antiJock rantings might appeal to BNP types, but not to me and, thanfully, not to 97% of Scots, as shown by the latest Yougov poll.

342

Alan B,

28/11/2008 15:46:34
Should we blame labour for the current economic mess or the dafties that voted them in?
343

The Master,

28/11/2008 15:48:05
#357: funny that you fail to see the point of Alf Garnett: he sends up dogmatic opinionated pseudo Tory types with imagined grievances who think they've got a magic answer to everything (why does this remind me of Scot Nats rather than the BNP???)
344

Alan B,

28/11/2008 15:50:11
In the story that we cannot comment on on the other thread regarding the arrest of a tory mp

"THE stories at the centre of the arrest are believed to be sourced from leaked Whitehall documents and include:
• Revelations that the Home Office hired illegal immigrants as cleaners in its own offices.
• A memo from the Home Secretary's office warning that around 5,000 illegal immigrants were employed in sensitive security posts after a Home Office-sanctioned vetting department failed to check applicants properly.
• A memo from the Home Secretary to the Prime Minister stating what the security consequences of the economic downturn would be.
• A list of MPs opposed to now-failed Government plans to detain terror suspects without charge for up to 42 days."


None of the issues regard national security and all are genuine issues that could/should be in the public domain.

It shows how evil this labour party are with they way they have abused the law and are turning the whole country into a police state.
345

TWC,

28/11/2008 15:51:04
358 Alan B

Guilty
346

Earman,

Paphos 28/11/2008 15:52:12
I have been away for some time, and am dismayed to find that the talents and abilities of the Scottish people are still being denigrated by the usual gathering of naysaying "naw, we cannae" merchants. Exactly what happened to these posters to make them so sceptical of said talents and abilities? When their sneers are replaced with IDEAS then perhaps they shall be able to add to the debate instead of simply rubbishing every single idea that might....just might, be of benefit to the well-being of the Scottish people.
347

Hamish Scott,

28/11/2008 15:54:57
REBELLION OVER PRAVDA-LIKE SCOTSMAN - Pressure continues to mount on the Scotsman and its owners Johnstone Press as its circulation and share price continue to fall. A senior source said 'we have made a massive mistake in turning the Scotsman into a propaganda rag for the Labour Party and unionism generally'. Jobs may go at the Scotsman's online forum centre. Team member Rufus T Firefly, speaking only on condition of anonymity, insisted he had no idea what was going on. 'You will mention my name though?' he asked 'my mum is really proud of me, especially my SVQ in Trolling. She thinks I might even get a girlfriend one day and maybe my own place.'
348

Alan B,

28/11/2008 15:57:16
#TWC

I can understand 97 and possibly just about 2001. But 2005?

We all knew about the scottish manufacturing meltdown in the late 90s under brown. We all knew about the recession in scotland (yes all that talk of continuous growth is the whole uk not scotland) in 2001/2002.

All their dodgy dealing were pretty much public (dodgy donations etc) and it was pretty obvious that the rear end was going to fall out the economy at some point. It was just when and if it was going to be a softish landing. All the lies about labour iraq and hutton were known.

I mean why would anybody support labour now that they have brought back mandelson, who is always doing something dodgy.
349

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 16:03:30
#363 Earman

Well said. Haste ye back to Scotland!

#359 Master

Alf Garnett was created as a racist, ignorant bigot who detested the Scots, Irish, Black people, Asians, gay people, etc. and who was an embarrassment to his wife and daughter. Yes, he was an exaggerated charicature, to schock people into relaising their prejudices were unjust. Unlike you, I would never dream to quote him in admiration!

The SNP is in favour of immigration to help bolster economic growth, and regards all those who choose to live in Scotland as New Scots. If you had ever attended an SNP conference you would see that we have members from many cultures and origins, including many English folk who want the best for Scotland - the more the merrier.

The SNP values their contribution, and is a broad church, with a common purpose to seek what we believe is the optimum course for Scotland and her people.

If yiu disagree that is fine. I will respect your view if it is fairly put. However, you guys just seek to throw insults. Says it all really.

350

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 16:11:14
Not my day

"Shock people" was what I meant to type. Should slow down the typing a bit....
351

The Master,

28/11/2008 16:28:28
#367: if the SNP really is a "broad church" etc etc and has no reactionary underbelly then I can only say that this is highly unusual for a nationalist party. 'Nuff said!

#370: so you're retiring, are you, oh man of a thousand identities!
352

Ghengis McCann,

Edinburgh 28/11/2008 16:36:35
...and so it rumbles on. CyberGnats with nothing to say revert to type - crude insults and blaming the voters for being either too stupid or too traitrous to embrace the one true faith and vote SNP. All criticism, all non-hagiographic comment, all attempts at policy analysis, are just part of the great anti-Gnat conspiracy.

The Gnats have really only one doctrine and it is absolute - we are right, do as we say, dissent will not be tolerated, all heretics will be put to the sword.
353

brownlie,

28/11/2008 16:37:58
367 PaulW


Excellent post, Paul, but I suspect your common sense will fall on stony ground.
354

PaulW,

Borders 28/11/2008 16:44:46
#371

I can only go by what I see and what I know of those who I have met. In my patch, we have English members who make a great contribution and many English voters who admire our social democratic policies. The key is that they believe in Scotland - after all they have made a positive decision to live here because they love the country and its people.

If only all those born in Scotland could be as positive about their country, we would be really going places as a nation. You guys just can't seem to grasp that the SNP is a civic nationalist organisation, not one based upon race. Perhaps that is because from the earliest days Scotland's peoples (Gaels, Scots, Picts, Angles, Normans) forged a country and nation based upon a territory, and an ideal of sovereignty of the people and their right to control their own Kirk and counrty, and not any racial definition.

And Master, what about labour's treatment of asylum seekers as a political footballs, in trying to prevent erosion of its vote in the North, london and yorkshire, or Norman tebbit's cricket test etc. Reactionary surely?

The Unionist parties, and UKIP, ARE British nationalist parties. Do they have a reactionary underbelly? They most certainly do - the Kelvin Mackenzie cohort in both Labour and Tories. Lib Dems are perhaps not so bad outwardly, but they hate us nationalists with a vengence, probably beacuse they are European federalists (no offence FFKAN!) so we are the "enemy".
355

brownlie,

28/11/2008 16:49:55
372 Ghengis

You appear to be talking to yourself but I suspect you'll need to be more convincing.
356

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 16:55:42
339 The Master (responding about a deleted thread)

"what would you do if, as a moderator, you were confronted with screeds of chippy nationalist bile?"

Listen sonny. The nonsense spouted on the thread yesterday was by a unionist troll. Get real.
357

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 16:57:58
Feds

Possibly 30 "free" periods? Get back to work. I don't pay my taxes so you can lounge around instead of teaching the weans.
358

,

28/11/2008 16:59:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
359

The Master,

28/11/2008 16:59:41
#376: I shall retire after the SNP quietly rebrands itself and puts the separation policy aside to concentrate on other policies.

I shall not rest until this most foolhardy and damaging of policies is finally put to bed. This clause 4 of a policy will one day be put out of its misery and I intend to live to see it happen: the Master has spoken!
360

TWC,

28/11/2008 17:04:21
Ala B

I won't make that mistake this time.

361

The Master,

28/11/2008 17:08:20
#380: how do you know that all the monikers you mention are one and the same?

I'm surprised that you didn't included my own moniker in your list, as I myself have frequently been accused of being kimba etc. However, we have very different styles and registers, so that's just nonsense!

362

TWC,

28/11/2008 17:08:50
#381 The Master is a poodle.
New Labour, No Policies, No Economics, No MSPs, No Idea.

No Chance even the press are questioning their blind support. Stalin is about to become Mr Bean once again.

All Boom and Bust just like his predecessors.

They have their haunted look back, they look like they have been siphoning petrol
363

PC Caledonia,

28/11/2008 17:12:42
Hugh Roscombe is "Hoots" Fandango is Methalions.

You don't need a Pept of Linguistics to work that out.
364

Hugh Roscombe,

28/11/2008 17:15:25
I've noticed that everyone seems to clock off for a bit around 5:00pm. Are you posting during your work's time?
For shame.