Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Friday, 5th December 2008

Haggis Hunt is now on!

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Brown's handing SNP win on plate



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: 11 August 2008
PARTY politics leave me cold. I'm not a card-carrying, Saltire-waving separatist though I wouldn't rule out independence. If there was such a thing as a common sense party that wasn't hide-bound by partisan policies and blind allegiances I'd vote for it. So I'm pretty much what you'd call a floating voter.
But increasingly, the question I'm asking myself is precisely what benefits Scotland derives from being part of the UK.

Normally when any community or company is joined to a larger one there are advantages... economies of scale, bulk-purchase powe
r, a standardisation of costs, advantageous concessions and regulations that bind the membership together and make a union worthwhile.

The news that in the last month Scots food bills have risen ten times faster than those in the rest of the UK is further evidence, as far as I'm concerned, that the UK is falling apart, regardless of any inroads made by the SNP. And we are getting a raw deal.

The excuse we are invariably given is the cost of fuel and petrol being higher because of Scotland's remote and rural nature. Anyone would think we were a small outpost in Siberia. The distance between Land's End and John O'Groats is a mere 874 miles, not much bigger than one US state.

Can that really explain why bread, butter, mince and tatties should be so much more expensive in Scotland?

Particularly galling is the fact that we pay even more for local produce – everything from oil to Scottish beef – because it is sent to England for processing and distribution and, in effect, we have to buy it back as well as pay extra transport costs.

Of course, to many English MPs and some English voters, particularly those obsessed with the West Lothian question of why Scottish MPs should vote on English matters in Westminster while English MPs have no say on Scottish matters in Holyrood, we are a bunch of whingers who get great support and resource from the UK and should be grateful.

It's doubtful whether most people in England are even aware that the cost of living is so high here. Certainly it still comes as a surprise to most of them that Edinburgh house prices, despite the credit crunch, remain among the highest in Britain.

Surely, if we are full and equal members of UK Inc, we should be expected to pay roughly the same for our commodities as anyone in, say, Birmingham.

If not, what's the point of being in the club?

That point was recognised for Londoners as far back as 1920 when the London weighting allowance was introduced. Because of the cost of living in the UK capital, civil servants, teachers, police and key workers were paid more than anyone else. Still tToday it's worth between £3000 and £4000 extra on salary.

Today the Government says price fixing is beyond its control. Since utilities and transport were denationalised and we charged full-tilt towards a free, privatised market, commercial companies have been able to charge what they like and the laws of supply and demand are supposed to provide the answer for everything.

No-one wants to see Communist-type state control with the Government fixing the price of a loaf but neither is a free-for-all that leaves Scots penalised under the somewhat spurious excuse that remoteness is calculated on the basis of distance from London and the South-East, a sustainable plan for the future.

Is it beyond the bounds of possibility that suppliers and retailers should function on UK prices that would cost the southern English a little more and the northerners a little less to level the playing field?

Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling's response to that may well be that they are powerless to intervene. But if so they must recognise that by leaving Scots, even those without strong nationalist tendencies, feeling like ripped-off and second-class citizens, they are handing Scotland to the SNP on a plate.

Driving for change
I ALMOST cried reading the tragic News story of Ian Sayers, whose baby son was killed in a collision after Ian drove his car on the wrong side of the road while on holiday in Southern France. It's a heartbreaking burden for him to carry and in starting an awareness campaign for tourists travelling abroad by car he's trying to bring some good from his personal horror. It's long overdue.

Everyone thinks they are a good driver who can easily cope with using the other side of the road. But it's extremely disorientating. Frankly, I refuse to even try driving abroad. My husband has experienced driving on the right all over the world. Yet a few years ago we too took a Spanish roundabout in the wrong direction... mercifully, nothing was coming the other way.

One second's lack of concentration in an alien environment is all it takes. Perhaps we need more than the sticker by the rear-view mirror that Ian has come up with. Perhaps we need public information advertisements, posters, and warnings issued by all airlines and ferry operators.

Perhaps many more of us should admit we just aren't up to the challenge of driving abroad at all.



The full article contains 875 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 11 August 2008 12:34 PM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Helen Martin
 
1

familymanwith2jobsandawifeworkingfulltime,

EDinburgh 11/08/2008 13:03:59
You are right in the first instance, economies of scale are the benefits of being part of the UK. Can you imagine the costs involved in having our own currency, military etc etc., all supported by a city (Glasgow) that has one of the highest employment and crime rates in Europe. Taxation would have to be horrendous to support all of that.
2

familymanwith2jobsandawifeworkingfulltime,

EDinburgh 11/08/2008 13:08:53
Forgot to add - the Scottish Parliament is not helping our cause within the UK - its hindering our progress and will know doubt enivetibaly lead to independance. I for one never voted for a Scottish Parliament, but have to suffer the consequencies of its very existance.
3

Linda,

Edinburgh 11/08/2008 13:11:05
Small economies are much more flexible than large ones and therefore can adapt better to world events.

This year Scotland will subsidise the UK treasury by £6 billion.

An independent Scotland would not have to pay its share of Foreign Wars or £25 billions to renew Trident Nuclear Weapons.
4

Hamish Scott,

11/08/2008 13:28:17
#1
Scottish taxpayers already pay for 'our' military. With independence our spending on defence would almost certainly reduce: no trident or its replacement; no invasion and occuapation of Iraq or whatever the next target is; no aircraft carriers costing over £4 billion each; etc.
5

Mikey,

11/08/2008 13:40:03
Familyman, the Scottish Parliament is not there to help out cause in the UK! It's there to help the cause of Scotland!

If you've got two jobs and a wife working full time, you're obviously unable to budget and live within your means, therefore, your pronouncements on finance are akin to that of a bankrupt running a major bank!

Since you hate this country so much, why are you here?

Whinger!
6

Londonroadguy,

nearby 11/08/2008 14:20:47
#1.Just looking at items in most of the major supermarkets reveal that most of the produce we eat is manufactured outside Scotland.Maybe we could have a REAL Scottish supermarket with Scottish products that might help create jobs in the poorer parts of country.In the meantime I try to do my bit by buying fish from the fishmongers,meat from the butchers and only Scottish bread,milk,fruit,potatoes,cheese ect..from the large supermarkets.
7

Zanardi,

Glasgow 11/08/2008 14:37:47
familymanwith2jobsandawifeworkingfulltime

Sorry, but your assertion re:Glasgow is frankly ill-researched and leaves you guilty of woefully outmoded thinking.

In the past 10 years the city of Glasgow has had the 2nd fastest growing city economy in Britain. It is the 3rd most successful city economy in Britain in terms of Gross Value Added, or GDP per capita. The top 5 are, as follows:

1.Edinburgh...£28,432
2.London......£27,672
3.Glasgow.....£24,375
4.Bristol.....£23,434
5.Aberdeen....£22,315

Re: Your other points.

1.Currency - we would either retain sterling, or more likely, opt to join the Euro. Can you explain why you think having your own currency is so foolhardy, given that the Swiss, the Danes, the Icelandic and the Norwegians seem pretty happy with theirs?

2.Military - Scotland presently spends around 4.5% of its GDP on the military. Norway spends around 1.7%, Ireland less than 1%. Norway has proportionately more naval ships and bases than Scotland. Of course, they don't have deadweights such as nuclear weapons, war in Iraq, war in Afghanistan or 'military advisory' roles in Nigeria to pay for...

3.'I for one didn't vote for a Scottish parliament...' Awww...tough. 75% of us did, and it's here to stay. Deal with it, make the best of it, and try to make the country better, rather than just whingeing about how inadequate you think we are in comparison to...well, everyone else.
8

SC,

11/08/2008 16:09:55
Zanardi, thank you.
9

a proud doonhamer,

Dumfries 11/08/2008 16:42:04
YouGov poll for the News of the World
Aug 6th to 8th 2008
Scottish Results
Westminster Parliament
(seats allocated by Electoral Calculus)

Conservatives 15 (0)
Labour 23 (7)
LibDem 15 (6)
SNP 43 (46)
Others 4 (0)
10

familymanwith2jobsandawifeworkingfulltime,

Edinburgh 11/08/2008 17:17:25
To all the haggis bashing individuals who have drawn reference to my comments above - I do apologies if I have somehow got the wrong end of the stick regarding Scotlands largest city. Correct me if I am wrong, I was under the impression that one in five of all males of working age in Glasgow, are unemployed. If anyone thinks they could build a vibrant economy on the back of that, then they are even more stupid than Mikey above. My finacial awareness is actually my greatest attribute thank you very much - the reason my wife and I work so hard is to try and get on in life and to provide a better future for our children than we had. What on earth is wrong with that??? If everyone showed our attitude towards work, instead of taking benefits and tax credits (that I have to pay for), then the UK would be a far better place. I am so against the Scottish parliament, as there are pretty obviously people drawing a salary there to allow the whole thing to exist. Seems such a waste of resources to me, when we already have a government in Westminster. I do think Gordon Brown is hopeless - David Cameron will do a better job when he gets in and will hopefully reward hard working individuals like my wife and I.
11

familymanwith2jobsandawifeworkingfulltime,

EDinburgh 11/08/2008 17:49:39
I just cant understand those narrow minded individuals keeping banging on about independance for Scotland - which I unfortunately think will happen one day. The way things are going, the rest of the UK will dump us.

Surely everyone will agree that for all Scottish companies, the UK is their biggest market. Anything that made trade more difficult throughout the UK, has to be a negative step for any business and our economy. I can't think of anything that would make trade more difficult than an independant Scotland and if we had the Euro as someone mentioned above, we would be in an impossible situation. The company I work for is owned by an English company and there must be countless businesses in this position - think of the damage an independant Scotland could do there. THe major players in Scotland, who provide us with jobs, are all UK companies - why would we want to make life difficult for them. There is nothing up here anymore, bar so called service industries and government jobs - the introduction of the Scottish parliament got rid of all the good jobs overnight. I wonder how many other major companies would pull out, if we were separate from the rest of the UK?? Cant imagine the major players staying up here, when it would all be happening in London. However, you just cant tell them - they think its as simple as Scotland versus England at football. Nowt as queeer as folk, as they say.
12

foxbat3000,

11/08/2008 18:55:55
A serious point to make is that if you read the GERS figures for 2006-2007 they allocate an insane 5.5% of Scottish GDP to defence not 4.5% also even the USA only spends 4% most likely we would spend what Denmark does 1.4%

Another point during Labours tenure at Hollyrood once it became obvious to all and sundry that the economic powers of the parliament were insufficient to fix Scotland's broken economy did they increase or ask for an increase in these powers no they didn't.

What I would love family man to answer is if Westminster rule was so economically competent how did it not manage to fix the Scottish economy?

Fixing Scotland's economy is not witchcraft its a simple matter of following the already tried and true policies other small nations have done achieving 3% growth should not be too difficult.

Family man Holyrood is here for good face reality and stop deluding yourself.





13

foxbat3000,

11/08/2008 19:11:46
Ireland and other small nations are globalised economies they sell to many markets this means that if one of those markets turns sour their whole economy does not go into recession.

However if all you are selling to is one market then when they go into recession so do you.
14

familymanwith2jobsandawifeworkingfulltime,

Edinburgh 11/08/2008 19:27:20
Foxbat3000 I accept the Scottish Parliament is here to stay, I have already said I think we will be independant one day - it doesn't mean I, or thousands like me, have to like it though.

The Scottish Parliament has broken Scotland's economy. Since its inception, I have watched countless engineering and manufacturing companies go to the wall, or move down south.

Think how much money could have been saved if we didn't have to pay all those free loader MSP's and we hadn't built the daft building at holywood.

Whatever you think regarding selling to other nations, we have a couple of problems there. One, we have nothing to sell and two, even if we did have, to get new busines, you have to take that business away from someone else. Not impossible, but certainly not easy and it is fact that Scotland's main and easiest market, is the UK.



15

"Hoots" Fandango,

11/08/2008 21:15:18
familmanetcetc

In a word - rubbish.
16

Patrick Henry,

Edinburgh 11/08/2008 23:07:33
As pointed out in the above article, Scotland is faced with serious problems which the Union does not help it to solve and which in many instances it actually causes. Independence would allow the Scottish Government to tackle the fundamental woes and inequalities which either result from the Union or which cannot be dealt with satisfactorily because on the one hand the UK government will not address them and on the other hand the Scottish Government cannot do so because it does not have the powers that it would have if Scotland were an independent state and a member of the European Union in its own right.

The modern case for the Union rests mainly on the abnormality of Scotland, and that is precisely why it is such a formidable case to meet, for Scotland in many ways is painfully abnormal. The most cursory study of its institutions and social, economic, and political life demonstrates that fact. The unionist, fixing his eyes on some of the secondary peculiarities and ignoring their fundamental cause, demonstrates it with ease, and by a habit of mind which yields only with infinite slowness to the growth of political enlightenment, passes instinctively to the deduction that Scottish abnormalities render Scotland unfit for independence. In other words, he prescribes for the disease a persistent application of the very treatment which has engendered it.

Whatever the result, there is a plausible answer. If Scotland is economically disadvantaged and afflicted with numerous associated ills, how can it deserve freedom? If it is peaceful, and shows symptoms of economic recuperation, clearly it does not need or even want it. In other words, if all that is healthy in the patient battles desperately and not in vain, first against irritant poison, and then against soporific drugs, this healthy struggle for self-preservation is attributed not to native vitality, but to the bracing regimen of unionist government.

The very same arguments were deployed by unionists in the
17

Patrick Henry,

Edinburgh 11/08/2008 23:09:43
The very same arguments were deployed by unionists in the early years of the last century in respect of Ireland. The dominant power tells the subject people that they are not fit for self-government because their country is so poor that it needs the support of the dominant power. Nevertheless, this so-called support, although claimed to produce some benefit, does not manage to give the subordinate territory the level of prosperity enjoyed by the dominant one, which, according to the latter, only goes to show how hopeless it would be for the subordinate territory to try to stand on its own feet.

Ireland has demonstrated, however, that it was poor because of the Union, having since achieved an extremely high level of prosperity as an independent country within the EU even though part of its territory was retained by the UK. If Scotland has the courage to take its destiny into its own hands, it will not suffer from that disadvantage. Indeed it will find it much easier in many ways to adjust to independence. The sooner unionist cant is comprehensively exposed as what it is the sooner that process can get under way. The sooner it gets under way the easier it will be.
18

Jack1000,

11/08/2008 23:30:55
I would love to know how Scotland spends 4.5% of it's GDP on Defence, when Defence policy is administered at a UK Level and accounts for 2% of GDP.

As for Defence, Scotland will lose more than it gains, with the Clydeside Naval base being the largest employer in Scotland.

I actually think England, Wales and NI should have a vote on the Union and Independence come 2010. The English want their own parliament and are generally the most in favour of breaking up the union.

Over 85% of UK GDP is generated by England, with Scottish Oil accounting for 1.5% of GDP compared to the 20% generated by London, and this figure can be doubled if you include the region around London.

As for Trident that can be easily moved to Devonport, with the possibility of closer ties with the French and their nuclear submarine base at Brest directly opposite Devonport. There is even the possibility of developing a joint SSN force.

Independence work both ways and surely the English should be given the opportunity to leave the Union come 2010.

19

Lauwrie,

12/08/2008 09:53:09
"But increasingly, the question I'm asking myself is precisely what benefits ENGLAND derives from being part of the UK."

er -----um ------- er -e


None.


20

Zanardi,

12/08/2008 11:03:24
Jack1000 said this

"As for Defence, Scotland will lose more than it gains, with the Clydeside Naval base being the largest employer in Scotland."

Absolute, unadulterated, propogandist garbage. I refer you to an answer from Hansard, in which the then Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon stated that only 966 jobs were dependent either directly or indirectly upon Trident.

See here

http://tinyurl.com/5uwcwn

Secondly, Scotland has at present one naval base. Norway has two. Explain to me how 4.5 million people can afford such a thing without the munificence of a larger neighbour? Could it be that they pay for it themselves?
21

Ian Campbell,

W Horsley & Tiree 12/08/2008 11:21:18
The English are asking the same question, Helen. What is the point of the Union with Scotland? It is past its sell-by date.
It is not just that Alex Salmond is making Gordon Brown look like an unhappy dancing bear. The Unionists are not giving us clear answers. Who on earth is going to read, voluntarily, the book on Britishness that Gordon Brown is proposing to write?
In the 21st century, a union between two countries should rest on the consent of the people. The Unionists refuse the put their confidence in the benefits of the Union to the test of a plebiscite.
Why do we need a British government to boss us about? We don't. Where is the 'Scandinavian government'? There isn't one.
Whatever he says in his book, Brown will not offer us in the British Isles the choice of Union, Federation or Independence - even though he put his name to the Claim of Right for Scotland which states unequivocally that the people of Scotland (and so by implication the people of England, Wales & N Ireland) have a sovereign right to determine the form of government that best suits their needs. It suited Gordon Brown to sign that statement. Now it suits him to ignore it.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.