The Scottish Government

#1675 Poll results

I read in the Press and Journal that there was a poll where support for independence had fallen to 23%. However, in the same poll, 55% were in favour of the Scottish Government having full taxing authority, also known as fiscal autonomy. That is a comfortable majority of 78%!

That means the Scottish Government would have complete control over all taxing and spending. That includes spending in all the areas that are presently under the control of Westminster. It is difficult to imagine having complete taxing and spending powers without legislative and governance authority. This is a sensible step towards contemplating self government.

Mr Salmond, in his speech to the SNP Conference, indicated that the Scottish Government was about to issue a report on the economic consequences of Scottish independence. I suspect that this is, at least in part, in response to many of the concerns voiced here on this forum.

How's about spending some time enlightening everyone about the benefits of separartion, because from what I hear of the latest poll, not many appear to be listening!!

#1629

A jibe often made at Labour since May is that they just can't accept losing the election.

I read your reply and wonder when the SNP intends to accept it is now in power and responsible for its promises.

Propoganda, Fife, 1653, writes "I can only speak for myself, but I do feel that it is important to poitn out that 64% of the Scottish Parliament do not subscribe to independence, nor do 2/3rds of the electorate"

The only bit of that which is right is "I can only speak for myself".

Your "64% of the Scottish Parliament" is based on the number of SNP members. Buty these aren't the only MSPs who suppor independence, there are also Green MSPs and a couple of "independents". In any case, nobody can say what percentage of MSPs would "subscribe to independence" in a free vote, without the party whips on, as there has never been a free vote, without the party whips on.

As for your "nor do 2/3rds of the electorate", complete nonsense. Party political support is useless for determining support on any one issue, because political parties have policies on hundreds of different issues, and you do not know which issues have been most important in deciding which way folk voted. Opinion polls have indicated that significant percentages of Labour, Liberal Democrat, and Conservative voters would vote for independence in a referendum, althugh they won't vote SNP in a party-political election. But neither opinion polls nor party-political-elections can settle this question. There is only ONE way to establish how many folk would support independence in a referendum, and that is to actually have the referendum.

REFERENDUM NOW - INDEPENDENCE - YES OR NO.

At last, I've been trying to find this web site for ages (it isn't easy). So the guy at number 1665 says we arent a country, is that right pal. He also says that London keeps us afloat, our population is decining and we are getting older. Well let's bloody go for it and see how we do on our own. I don't think that the SNP are as bad as the other lot were, from what I hear they seem to be OK just now. At least they are letting us know what is going on. I hope that they can change the council tax system as there are a lot of people I know in low pay work would have their bills reduced.
I also think that there should be a referendum so that we can all decide on independence or keeping the union.

[1665] “Scotland gets more money per capita than anywhere else in the UK” is the same misleading ‘subsidy’ argument conveyed in various forms by many of those supporting the case for the Union, and sometimes supposedly objective commentators. Almost without exception such statements are devoid of any argument referencing ‘UK infrastructure spending’ to ‘objectively balance’ such comments.

If you and your ‘best mate’ each raised £100 through sponsored events and your ‘best mate’ suggested that you split your £100 55/45 in cash while he invested his £100 in his own personal projects, of which he allowed you an average share split of 33/67 in his favour, would you think this was an ‘equitable arrangement’?

Would you still consider this an equitable arrangement, and perhaps even a ‘good outcome’, if his resultant wealth relatively increased while your resources relatively declined?

When he subsequently patronised your relative lack of ‘economic success’ and sought to diminish your ‘cash split’, and possibly your ‘share split’, would you still consider him your ‘best mate’?

Scotland’s current situation has not arisen from the “grass being greener on the other side” – respectfully, please ‘wake up and smell the roses’!

#1665 John Bobbit

"I want to go back to a time when being British made me proud - when Britain was Great."

Alas John that was when we had an Empire and that day has gone for good. We, the British, are now a multiple region state in the EU. Based on several multi-nation polls this situation is not popular in England, nor in any of the other member states except for Spain and Ireland. Scottish independence will still leave us in the EU (depending on who you listen to) and it is certainly the preference of the SNP although I am sure they would be open to holding a referendum on that question too.

You also say:

"Scotland gets more money per capita than anywhere else in the UK."

This is no doubt based upon the GERS report, which the BBC also referenced today in their discussion about Scottish independence and the West Lothian issue. However there are two other reports from independent think tanks in England, Local Government Futures and Oxford Economics, dealing with the same subject. According to these reports, the region gaining the most from the union is Northern Ireland with a profit of £4,212 per capita(taxes paid minus public spending in the region). Among those regions in a similar position, Scotland is actually the one with LEAST to gain with a profit of only £38 per capita. There are only three regions who are losing out, the East, South East and London. Other big gainers are the North East with £3,133 per capita profit and Wales with a £2,999 per capita profit.

In all the furore caused by these numbers in London and the South East we tend to forget that these regions are the wealthiest in the UK and their incomes are the highest. The public spending is also more highly concentrated so more likely to benefit larger numbers of people. Also, most of the companies doing business in the UK, and their highest paid executives, pay their taxes in London and the South East even though they derive their income from all parts of the UK. The same could also be said for the Royal Bank of Scotland with its head office in Edinburgh. In other words, these statistics can be used invidiously without a shred of justification. This is the nature of political cut and thrust debate perhaps but it is also why politicians are held in such low esteem by the people at large and why we trust them so little.

It is my belief that winning the argument is not the objective here. It is rather to present reasons why we believe independence or union would be better for Scotland and her people. The federal option has been covered in this forum and the arguments tend to be against it. Those against it appear to feel it is unworkable in such a small state. There is also the problem that most Englishmen appear not to want regional government which they see, correctly I believe, as the thin edge of the wedge to force them deeper into the EU.

I suspect that we are all aiming at the same objective from different angles. We just have different ways of expressing what that objective is and how to get there.

Surely we would all agree that having a stable and growing economy, providing meaningful well paid work for every Scot is a worthwhile goal. Is it attainable? If so how? Would it be more readily accomplished if the Scottish Government had more powers to make decisions bearing on growing the economy or would we get there quicker if these powers remain in the hands of the Westminster Government and Brussels? For myself, I believe that we could do much better with complete monetary and fiscal autonomy but I recognise that this is unlikely to happen in the near future, given the SNP's preference for the EU and the other parties for the UK.

Nevertheless I do believe we can move closer to that ideal if we begin with the first step of independence from England. It is easier for one person to be heard in a population of 5 million rather than one of 62 million.

I say England because historically it was England who was the driving force behind the Union and has always been the most influential member of it. This is not to say that many Scots have not benefited from the Union in the past, they have. But as I noted at the beginning, these days are, sadly, gone. We must come to recognise that fact and decide which future makes the most sense.

Whats with the "alexander sisters"? DID YOU SEE HOW WEE WENDY COULD NOT SAY HER VIEWS ON TRIDENT --SHE OBVIOUSLY HAD NOT CHECKED WITH LONDON TO SEE WHAT THEY ARE!!! AND AS FOR WEE DOUGGIE, HE CAME ACROSS AS SO SMUG AND ARROGANT SEEKING ONLY TO SHIFT THE BLAME FOR THE ELECTON TO OTHERS.THESE PAIR ARE A COUPLE OF SPOILT WEANS-- THEY HAVE NEVER REALLY HAD PROPER JOBS ,HAVE TREAD A PRIMROSE PATH FROM THE MANSE TO UNIVERSITY(WITH GRANTS)TO THE LABOUR PARTY AND YET HAVE THE BAREFACED CHEEK TO TELL US HOW TO LIVE.SO TYPICAL OF TODAYS LABOUR PARTY .IT LOST ITS PURPOSE YEARS AGO AFTER THE WELFARE STATE AND EXISTS NOW ONLY TO PERPETUATE ITS OWN SELFISH POWER NEXUS.SCOTLAND DOES NOT NEED THIS SO CALLED DEPENDANCE ON LONDON BUT IS LEARNING TO REALISE AND MAXIMISE ITS ASSETS AND TO TAKE ITS PLACE ONCE MORE IN THE FAMILY OF NATIONS IN AN INTER-DEPENDANT WORLD!!!

Autonomy for Scotland in fairness implies equal autonomy for the other three Nations including England. Rather than wrestle with the West Lothian question we should perhaps consider why England alone has not opted for autonomy.

Historically England has a longer link with the London parliament and it is perhaps no surprise that it will not occur to them to opt out. Perhaps an assumption that if the rest go what remains will revert to them.

Constitutionaly the Westminster parliament is the UK government dealing with UK issues and it is therefor important that all MPs continue to vote on all matters.

If we are serious about Scottish autonomy we need to be prepared to enable England to see the way ahead for their own autonomy lies with an English Parliament which in turn requires a place to meet.

Fortunately at Westminster we have an extra chamber. There is room for both an autonomous English body and a single house UK parliament. Removing the House of Lords and replacing it with an elected second chamber would allow autonomy for each of the Nations without destroying any advantages which remain for an UK dimension.

John Bobbit - Glasgow *1665

PS - I think you'll find the population is NOT declining and that last year there was more babies born than people died so I'm afraid those arguments are also a little outdated!