Scottish independence and devolution superthread

[IMA MAROON]

I'll be voting for independence purely to piss other people off.

 

Infact no. It's not just that. I like to take risks and i also like to prove people wrong.

[TheMaganator]

http://m.scotsman.com/news/alex-massie-streets-apart-in-referendum-debate-1-3437190

Quite a good piece from Massie in the Scotsman

[AlphonseCapone]

100 days to go

[deesidejambo]

Whats the bookies saying? May as well make a few quid out of it. The vote wil be No.

[TheMaganator]

100 days to go

It's going to feel like a long 100 days!

 

Still, the feeling for one camp at the end of it will make it worth it!

[jambos are go!]

No thanks. Brilliant.IMO.

[scott_jambo]

 

So that's how Anne Budge made her money.

[Psychedelicropcircle]

This is a bit off topic....I was looking for info on how much the banks have repaid to the uk gov. Can't say I found a recent enough article online. Reason for asking would be in the event of a yes vote how much would our debt percentage be?

[jack D and coke]

 

So that's how Anne Budge made her money.

We're 8.3% of the population you'd assume most things would be divided up on something along those terms.

 

Edit: Oops replied to the wrong message there.

Edited June 9, 2014 by jack D and coke

[Rudolf]

Whats the bookies saying? May as well make a few quid out of it. The vote wil be No.

 

1/3 No and 3/1 Yes.

[TheMaganator]

We're 8.3% of the population you'd assume most things would be divided up on something along those terms.

 

Edit: Oops replied to the wrong message there.

I guess that is the theory. The UK govt owns the shares so I suppose we'd get our share of them classed as an asset. But then, we have no idea how the contract for the bail-out was drafted.

 

There may be no provision or mechanism to transfer the shares to a third party (the Scottish government) within the agreement.

 

I am not saying that's a reason to vote either way but it is just an example of the complexity of the task of unraveling 300 years of Union should we vote Yes.

 

Every single agreement of this or any sort will have to be unraveled or an agreement reached on it. It will be a ******* nightmare. & in 18 months?

[Psychedelicropcircle]

So my asking was to find out how much had been repaid to try to work out how much the torys had back and if any had been payed to national debt. It's 2014 surely they've payed some of it back?

[RXTech]

A poll of 1,000 North Sea oil and gas workers has found that 64% will vote in favour of Scottish independence:

 

http://news.stv.tv/north/278497-north-sea-workers-want-independence-according-to-website-survey/

[smallfaces]

Every single agreement of this or any sort will have to be unraveled or an agreement reached on it. It will be a ******* nightmare. & in 18 months?

 

Quite. And in those 18 months we will establish a new state structure, new revenue collection, new armed services, negotiate membership of the EU, membership of NATO, membership of the UN and formulate a fiscal union.

[Cade]

So my asking was to find out how much had been repaid to try to work out how much the torys had back and if any had been payed to national debt. It's 2014 surely they've payed some of it back?

 

wrong: the coalition have miraculously managed to keep the national debt spiraling upwards

 

Edited June 9, 2014 by Cade

[jambos are go!]

wrong: the coalition have miraculously managed to keep the national debt spiraling upwards

 

Have the Scottish Government made proposals to Westminster on how they can cut their part of the national debt. They could increase income tax and council tax for instance within the powers available to them.

[jambos are go!]

A poll of 1,000 North Sea oil and gas workers has found that 64% will vote in favour of Scottish independence:

 

http://news.stv.tv/n...website-survey/

 

Aye. Any poll but the major ones.

[TheMaganator]

A poll of 1,000 North Sea oil and gas workers has found that 64% will vote in favour of Scottish independence:

 

http://news.stv.tv/north/278497-north-sea-workers-want-independence-according-to-website-survey/

"Meanwhile, nearly half of all employers in the oil and gas industry say that the referendum has effected their investment plans."

 

You can pretty much roll out that stat over most of the economy, I'd wager.

[RXTech]

Aye. Any poll but the major ones.

 

Polls showing support for no = good

 

Polls showing support for yes = bad

 

 

"Meanwhile, nearly half of all employers in the oil and gas industry say that the referendum has effected their investment plans."

 

You can pretty much roll out that stat over most of the economy, I'd wager.

 

Or maybe not: the North Sea oil and gas industry reported that investment was at a 30-year high just last year: http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-21564947 and only last week did a report by The Aberdeen and Grampian Chambers of Commerce find that the industry was 'unfazed' by the prospect of independence. Indeed, more firms said it would be positive than negative: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27696776

 

That is combined with the fact that foreign inward investment into Scotland is also at a 16-year high: http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-27747527

 

So much for "oh the uncertainty" and "Scotland on pause" etc.

 

Quite frankly, anyone who believes that the Scottish economy, at the very least, wouldn't be on a par with how it is now post-indy isn't even worth debating with tbh.

Edited June 9, 2014 by RXTech

[RXTech]

That is combined with the fact that foreign inward investment into Scotland is also at a 16-year high: http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-27747527

 

What is also very interesting about Ernst and Young's findings:

 

The report goes on to warn that Scotland faces a battle to win the hearts and minds of global investors, as London and the south east becomes an increasingly powerful magnet for their money.

 

To help address this, the report urges the maximisation of global events to sharpen Scotland's competitive edge.

 

EY Scotland senior partner Jim Bishop said: "Scotland must increase efforts to sell its advantages to global investors if its impressive track record of securing FDI [Foreign Direct Investment] is to be maintained.

 

Address this as an independent sovereign state, or as a region of the UK where London and the south east continues to act like a vacuum cleaner?

 

Better Together.

Edited June 9, 2014 by RXTech

[jambos are go!]

Polls showing support for no = good

 

Polls showing support for yes = bad

 

 

 

 

Or maybe not: the North Sea oil and gas industry reported that investment was at a 30-year high just last year: http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-21564947

 

That is combined with the fact that foreign inward investment into Scotland is also at a 16-year high: http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-27747527

 

So much for "oh the uncertainty" and "Scotland on pause" etc.

 

Quite frankly, anyone who believes that the Scottish economy, at the very least, wouldn't be on a par with how it is now post-indy isn't even worth debating with tbh.

All these improvements within the Union. Deciding the future of Scotland on the basis of the loose change of government finance is depressing whoever uses that arguement. Its a much bigger question than that. Its whether we are better together or better apart and thats about much more than money.

[jambos are go!]

What is also very interesting about Ernst and Young's findings:

 

 

 

Address this as an independent sovereign state, or as a region of the UK where London and the south east continues to act like a vacuum cleaner?

 

Better Together.

Are you suggesting that all the money going into London and the South East is ring fenced and none of the accrued revenues benefit Scotland and the rest of the UK in anyway whatsover. Directly or indirectly. Really!!! Edited June 9, 2014 by jambos are go!

[Gizmo]

Have the Scottish Government made proposals to Westminster on how they can cut their part of the national debt. They could increase income tax and council tax for instance within the powers available to them.

 

why does the Scottish Government have to sort out Westminster's incompetence?

 

They have bankrupted the UK - plenty economists do no believe we can recover from such indebtedness.

 

"Better Together"

[RXTech]

All these improvements within the Union.

 

"Too wee, too poor, too stupid" type-post, imho.

 

Deciding the future of Scotland on the basis of the loose change of government finance is depressing whoever uses that arguement.

 

"The loose change of government finance"?

 

Its whether we are better together or better apart and thats about much more than money.

 

Clearly: although the economic argument for Scottish independence is most definitely solid. I don't think the no lot like bringing it down to arguing about democracy either, given that the UK is woefully undemocratic.

 

Are you suggesting that all the money going into London and the South East is ring fenced and none of the accrued revenues benefit Scotland and the rest of the UK in anyway whatsover. Directly or indirectly. Really!!!

 

Erm, quite clearly no. Are you suggesting that the horrendously centralised UK drip-feeding (apparently) the rest of the Britain is sensible?

 

 

Bearing in mind that Scotland generates more revenue per head of population for the UK economy than every single "region" outside of Greater London, I think you'll find the answer is quite clearly "no".

Edited June 9, 2014 by RXTech

[jambos are go!]

"Too wee, too poor, too stupid" type-post, imho.

 

 

 

"The loose change of government finance"?

 

 

 

Clearly: although the economic argument for Scottish independence is most definitely solid. I don't think the no lot like bringing it down to arguing about democracy either, given that the UK is woefully undemocratic.

 

 

 

Erm, quite clearly no. Are you suggesting that the horrendously centralised UK drip-feeding (apparently) the rest of the Britain is sensible?

 

 

Bearing in mind that Scotland generates more revenue per head of population for the UK economy than every single "region" outside of Greater London, I think you'll find the answer is quite clearly "no".

It was the Arch YES Journalist Ian MacWhirter who pointed out that the arguements about the economy were about 'loose change' IIRC.

why does the Scottish Government have to sort out Westminster's incompetence?

 

They have bankrupted the UK - plenty economists do no believe we can recover from such indebtedness.

 

"Better Together"

Because we share the debt and will inherit our share if we vote YES.

[jambos are go!]

"Too wee, too poor, too stupid" type-post, imho.

 

 

 

"The loose change of government finance"?

 

 

 

Clearly: although the economic argument for Scottish independence is most definitely solid. I don't think the no lot like bringing it down to arguing about democracy either, given that the UK is woefully undemocratic.

 

 

 

Erm, quite clearly no. Are you suggesting that the horrendously centralised UK drip-feeding (apparently) the rest of the Britain is sensible?

 

 

Bearing in mind that Scotland generates more revenue p

 

er head of population for the UK economy than every single "region" outside of Greater London, I think you'll find the answer is quite clearly "no".

Sorry having some problems with the editor

 

Your response about improvements within the Union is there for all to judge and I'll hold my tongue

 

It was the Arch YES Journalist Ian MacWhirter who pointed out that the arguements about the economy were about 'loose change' IIRC.

 

The question I was asking is whether or not you have evidence to show that all taxation and wealth associated London and the South East is ring fenced and does not benefit the rest of the UK in any way. Your graph is about wealth and does not address that issue.

[jack D and coke]

Interesting article that seems to suggest voting Yes will basically kill socialism stone dead....

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/torcuil-crichton-irish-history-shows-3663355

[Ulysses]

Interesting article that seems to suggest voting Yes will basically kill socialism stone dead....

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/torcuil-crichton-irish-history-shows-3663355

 

He's right about the history of how Fianna Fail "stole the clothes" of the Labour Party and the trade union movement in Ireland.

 

That should not necessarily mean that things would play out the same way in an independent Scotland, but given the SNP's tendency in the direction of Fianna Fail-style populist politics in recent years, it is a possibility.

 

Some posters have suggested that the SNP would be putting itself out of business if a Yes vote happened. That's not the case. If Scotland were to become independent the SNP would try -- would have no choice but to try - to entrench itself as the "natural party of government". The way to do that in most countries is to occupy the centre and soft right of the political spectrum. Perhaps in Scotland the political fulcrum would be a little bit more left, but the principle would be the same.

[Alba gu Brath]

As to being Better Together, saw this today from Oxfam Scotland. Sure, a Yes vote won't change it immedietely but can anyone honestly claim that a No vote will see us 'reap the benefits of the union'? These are shocking statistics and the problems go back decades. After a no-vote, London Labour and Tory can continue to blame it on each other.

 

Edited June 9, 2014 by Alba gu Brath

[JamboX2]

Interesting article that seems to suggest voting Yes will basically kill socialism stone dead....

http://www.dailyreco...y-shows-3663355

 

Chricton is pretty close to a point I've feared resulting from this whole thing. The politics to which Labour is used to and thrives in is a focus on issues such as poverty, workers rights, welfare etc through a left-right spectrum. To them it's been a nightmare fighting the SNP since 2007 because what normally works against Tories - ie you're not interested in the poor, you're spending money away from poverty relief, is met with a nice, cuddly spiel of what the SNP does is in Scotland's interests and that should come first and foremost for the benefit of the nation as a whole, not a section of society - like ie the poorest or the most vulnerable. That is hard to beat because like Finna Fail you are all things to all men at all times, and issues to which we are used to being slogged out on a right-left spectrum is diminished as you can reinvent and adapt this nothingness of nationalism and civic nationalism into what you want it to be.

 

Socialism and a lefty Scotland is by no means a guarantee either with a Yes or a No vote. My prediction for 2016 is an SNP win of sorts, either way this vote goes. I don't think Labour will ever climb into government with the SNP, for good reasons to me. Like the Greens, they are suspicious of where the SNP really lies in politics. I've said this a lot, but the Tories lapped up the SNP budgets of 2007-11 and pushed a lot of them through with glee. The reduction in anti-poverty funding and the pushing of certain regressive policies in terms of social justice and finances, to me, suggests the SNP aren't the nice lefty bunch they've sold themselves as. I think they're much more like the soft-right to which Uly has spoke about below.

 

He's right about the history of how Fianna Fail "stole the clothes" of the Labour Party and the trade union movement in Ireland.

 

That should not necessarily mean that things would play out the same way in an independent Scotland, but given the SNP's tendency in the direction of Fianna Fail-style populist politics in recent years, it is a possibility.

 

Some posters have suggested that the SNP would be putting itself out of business if a Yes vote happened. That's not the case. If Scotland were to become independent the SNP would try -- would have no choice but to try - to entrench itself as the "natural party of government". The way to do that in most countries is to occupy the centre and soft right of the political spectrum. Perhaps in Scotland the political fulcrum would be a little bit more left, but the principle would be the same.

 

I agree on your final paragraph. A yes vote does not create a new politics. It establishes a Scottish Political establishment. The SNP will be emboldened and likely win subsequent elections from 2014 on. They do seem to be shaped in the mould of Irish parties, ie the nationalism issue is a vehicle to be a non-descript party which has no ideological roots to be tied to or linked with allows them to be and sell what they want (Ie populists).

 

If we get independence then it should be an independence where nationalism and nationalist parties have no place what so ever. The role of government should be to facilitate and encourage co-operation between Unions and Employers and so on, but it should not replace them by taking control of negotiations and jumping in too quick - as the First Minister has done repeatedly. Their role should be a facilitator and stepping in a last resort as that is not their realm. It should be a politics of the left-centre-right, where debate is about policy and ideology and not about personalities and who has Scotland's best interests at heart (all Scottish politicians do afterall).

 

Sadly I fear we wont get that in a Yes or a No vote. Scotland may have a great people, but we aren't half saddled by politicians who in one party are obssessed with this idea of nationalism and another bunch who are having a mid-life crisis and struggling to develop a platform capable of taking them on.

[JamboX2]

As to being Better Together, saw this today from Oxfam Scotland. Sure, a Yes vote won't change it immedietely but can anyone honestly claim that a No vote will see us 'reap the benefits of the union'? These are shocking statistics and the problems go back decades. After a no-vote, London Labour and Tory can continue to blame it on each other.

 

 

I agree it's shocking. But Health care is devolved and it's up to individuals to better their own lives with the right help from the right people and bodies. The role of government is to offer this help and foster a climate to which this change is a social norm. Independence wont change that fact. It's also the case the current Holyrood government has done more to help force local government cut a lot of the services many of the worst off in Scotland relied on to make a change.

 

I note you say blame each other. What's your position on right-left debate? Debate as to attitudes and how government does this? Instead of the populism of the nationalists which lacks any real longevity and strategic planning when it comes to this, and fails to really look at challenging culture and society to change?

 

Can you cite one single policy from the SNP to make changes to reverse this decline? Or any party for that? I can't.

 

These issues are solveable and arrestable now. There's no need to wait till 2016. Change is open to us now. The power is here now to make huge changes. The will is simply non-existent.

[TheMaganator]

As to being Better Together, saw this today from Oxfam Scotland. Sure, a Yes vote won't change it immedietely but can anyone honestly claim that a No vote will see us 'reap the benefits of the union'? These are shocking statistics and the problems go back decades. After a no-vote, London Labour and Tory can continue to blame it on each other.

 

How long do you think it'd take to fix this?

 

We've had our own Parliament since '97.

 

Faux union bashing won't win you this referendum.

[Gizmo]

It was the Arch YES Journalist Ian MacWhirter who pointed out that the arguements about the economy were about 'loose change' IIRC.Because we share the debt and will inherit our share if we vote YES.

 

Whilst not ratified, the existing precdent for secession states is to take neither assets nor debts upon leaving. We may currently share this debt but we certanly didnt see the proper benefit from it. The figures for London centric spending v rest of the uk are appalling.

 

Transport spending per head: London ?2,700. North E England ?5.00

 

Cultural spending per head: London ?69 Rest of England ?4.50

 

It is obvious where Westminsters priorities lie. Perhaps we should alleviate them of one less place to (not) bother about!

[RXTech]

The question I was asking is whether or not you have evidence to show that all taxation and wealth associated London and the South East is ring fenced and does not benefit the rest of the UK in any way. Your graph is about wealth and does not address that issue.

 

Erm, it's obviously not "ring fenced" but it is incredibly obvious where the vast majority of wealth is distributed and where the majority of infrastructure investment in the United Kingdom is situated.

 

The above graph is one of the most relevant pieces of evidence showing how badly screwed over Scotland is in this cold, dead union.

 

Interesting article that seems to suggest voting Yes will basically kill socialism stone dead....

http://www.dailyreco...y-shows-3663355

 

The Labour Party... Socialists... Aye right.

 

But yeah, devolution was supposed to kill nationalism stone dead and that clearly hasn't gone to plan.

[JamboX2]

 

 

 

Whilst not ratified, the existing precdent for secession states is to take neither assets nor debts upon leaving. We may currently share this debt but we certanly didnt see the proper benefit from it. The figures for London centric spending v rest of the uk are appalling.

 

Transport spending per head: London ?2,700. North E England ?5.00

 

Cultural spending per head: London ?69 Rest of England ?4.50

 

It is obvious where Westminsters priorities lie. Perhaps we should alleviate them of one less place to (not) bother about!

 

What's your opinion on the higher per head spending across the board in Glasgow to the rest of Scotland?

[RXTech]

What's your opinion on the higher per head spending across the board in Glasgow to the rest of Scotland?

 

Given Glasgow is the largest city in Scotland, it probably generates the most taxation in Scotland outside of the wealthier Edinburgh and Aberdeen.

 

Dishing out higher spending per head figures, similar to what Bitter Together and the Daily Mail do, without mentioning how much these places actually contribute towards that spending is very unfair.

 

It's one of the main reasons why many people in England think they subsidise Scotland: because they only hear that public spending is higher, but not the fact that taxation generated is also higher.

Edited June 9, 2014 by RXTech

[JamboX2]

 

 

 

Given Glasgow is the largest city in Scotland, it probably generates the most taxation in Scotland outside of the wealthier Edinburgh and Aberdeen.

 

Dishing out higher spending per head figures, similar to what Bitter Together and the Daily Mail do, without mentioning how much these places actually contribute towards that spending is very unfair.

 

It's one of the main reasons why many people in England think they subsidise us: because they only hear that public spending is higher in Scotland, and not the fact that taxation is also higher.

 

London generates more tax revenue than Scotland. Should its wealth producers, it's people, not get a fair cut of that cake? Perhaps more than the other areas?

 

If Scotland wants a bigger or total share of oil revenue the same applies to London and what it makes. The issue is that fiscal redistribution occurs in all nations and in all areas of population. Glasgows wealth subsidises it's poverty. Scottish wealth from Aberdeen and Edinburgh is disproportionately spent in Glasgow on all things from hospitals and schools to roads and railways.

 

You said Glasgow is the largest area in terms of population as a defence of why it gets more money. London is an area of 9million people. So it's spending, by what you said is arguably justifiably larger.

 

What Yes do is try and create an argument whereby it's not England, it's London. But then it's not London it's the Westminster elite. London is not a land of dollar millionaires. The poverty in inner City London is as bad if not worse than some of the rest of the UK in terms of poverty. I dearest this as much as poverty in any part of Scotland.

 

Independence and nationalism to me is not a cure for poverty. It's why I have never voted, nor will ever vote, SNP. The politics and argument to me is not socialistic. Instead of making a fist of caring for all like us, we care for ourselves only. It's my stumbling block to me voting yes. It sounds great. A Jerusalem of Scotland. Milk and honey. An end to poverty, it's what we hear. My head tells me that's a pipe dream and it also says that it's really just cutting ourselves out the UK to run a gravey train for a new establishment here.

[jambo1185]

 

 

Given Glasgow is the largest city in Scotland, it probably generates the most taxation in Scotland outside of the wealthier Edinburgh and Aberdeen.

 

Dishing out higher spending per head figures, similar to what Bitter Together and the Daily Mail do, without mentioning how much these places actually contribute towards that spending is very unfair.

 

It's one of the main reasons why many people in England think they subsidise Scotland: because they only hear that public spending is higher, but not the fact that taxation generated is also higher.

 

And the reason this logic (which I agree with) doesnt apply to London within the UK is...?

 

Your posts read like you are trying to have it both ways, hit the union because public spending is high in London vs other areas, whilst justifying why its fine for public spending to be high in Glasgow vs other areas in Scotland.

 

Maybe I've not picked up your posts right but you do seem to be saying situation x is currently terrible, but replicated in a Scottish context its absolutely fine. And this is a problem, because if you think its a disgrace for money to be focused on London even with all the income it generates, there will be the exact same when in an independent Scotland people feel Glasgow is seeing most money come its way.

 

Edited June 10, 2014 by jambo1185

[jambo1185]

As to being Better Together, saw this today from Oxfam Scotland. Sure, a Yes vote won't change it immedietely but can anyone honestly claim that a No vote will see us 'reap the benefits of the union'? These are shocking statistics and the problems go back decades. After a no-vote, London Labour and Tory can continue to blame it on each other.

 

 

Yes you are right, this is a disgrace. Have successive Scottish governments managed to do anything to improve this? Presumably it was even lower, if only a little, pre-devolution? Although a small shift may be as much down to general life expectancy improvement than successful policy.

 

Given the wide range of devolved matters which we control, im not convinced that rightly held anger on this topic can only be levied at Westminster.

Edited June 10, 2014 by jambo1185

[jambos are go!]

Average male life expectancy in Glasgow is 76.2 and average life expectancy in parts of Kenya is 40. We can all play statistics.

[jambo1185]

Average male life expectancy in Glasgow is 76.2 and average life expectancy in parts of Kenya is 40. We can all play statistics.

 

Whilst I agree that Oxfam have been a bit clever in their use of statistics, the poverty in parts of Glasgow is horrendous and local councils and Holyrood must shoulder some responsibility.

[TheMaganator]

 

 

Given Glasgow is the largest city in Scotland, it probably generates the most taxation in Scotland outside of the wealthier Edinburgh and Aberdeen.

 

Dishing out higher spending per head figures, similar to what Bitter Together and the Daily Mail do, without mentioning how much these places actually contribute towards that spending is very unfair.

 

It's one of the main reasons why many people in England think they subsidise Scotland: because they only hear that public spending is higher, but not the fact that taxation generated is also higher.

But you've just criticised the UK for spending more on London?!

 

So it's fine for this to happen in Scotland - just not in the UK.

[billco98]

Whilst I agree that Oxfam have been a bit clever in their use of statistics, the poverty in parts of Glasgow is horrendous and local councils and Holyrood must shoulder some responsibility.

 

Holyrood does not have the tools to do the job. That's what the Referendum is about.

 

Sticking with the status quo keeps us locked into the system that gave us the systemic problems associated with urban deprivation which blight large parts of our cities, particularly Glasgow and its conurbation.

 

That might be OK with you, and I won't waste my time here trying to convert you, but it sure isn't OK with me. We need a sea change change in government policy to seriously address the problem. Westminster will never provide that change. I've given the status quo the chance for almost 50 years i.e as long as I've had the vote. But now I am finished with all that - I'll vote YES in September, not for what I can get out of it but for the benefit of future generations across this country.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

Holyrood does not have the tools to do the job. That's what the Referendum is about.

 

Sticking with the status quo keeps us locked into the system that gave us the systemic problems associated with urban deprivation which blight large parts of our cities, particularly Glasgow and its conurbation.

 

That might be OK with you, and I won't waste my time here trying to convert you, but it sure isn't OK with me. We need a sea change change in government policy to seriously address the problem. Westminster will never provide that change. I've given the status quo the chance for almost 50 years i.e as long as I've had the vote. But now I am finished with all that - I'll vote YES in September, not for what I can get out of it but for the benefit of future generations across this country.

What other tools do they need to improve life expectancy?

 

Moreover, do you really want more people living beyond pension age?

[jambos are go!]

Holyrood does not have the tools to do the job. That's what the Referendum is about.

 

Sticking with the status quo keeps us locked into the system that gave us the systemic problems associated with urban deprivation which blight large parts of our cities, particularly Glasgow and its conurbation.

 

That might be OK with you, and I won't waste my time here trying to convert you, but it sure isn't OK with me. We need a sea change change in government policy to seriously address the problem. Westminster will never provide that change. I've given the status quo the chance for almost 50 years i.e as long as I've had the vote. But now I am finished with all that - I'll vote YES in September, not for what I can get out of it but for the benefit of future generations across this country.

Holyrood has tax raising powers it declines to impelment. Its headline policies on council tax and student fees gives benefits to the better off and a change could release funds to tackle this issue. Holyrood and local councils are happy to see social problems concentrated (or ghettoised in) certain locations like Carlton in Glasgow( the source of the headline figure). Holyrood also has control of huge spending on Health and it most certainly has the tools to do the job.

 

Regardless of the result of the Referendum there should be public insistence on Holyrood to use its powers to tackle Scotlands need.

[billco98]

Holyrood has tax raising powers it declines to impelment. Its headline policies on council tax and student fees gives benefits to the better off and a change could release funds to tackle this issue. Holyrood and local councils are happy to see social problems concentrated (or ghettoised in) certain locations like Carlton in Glasgow( the source of the headline figure). Holyrood also has control of huge spending on Health and it most certainly has the tools to do the job.

 

Regardless of the result of the Referendum there should be public insistence on Holyrood to use its powers to tackle Scotlands need.

 

Yeah, right.

[TheMaganator]

Holyrood has tax raising powers it declines to impelment. Its headline policies on council tax and student fees gives benefits to the better off and a change could release funds to tackle this issue. Holyrood and local councils are happy to see social problems concentrated (or ghettoised in) certain locations like Carlton in Glasgow( the source of the headline figure). Holyrood also has control of huge spending on Health and it most certainly has the tools to do the job.

 

Regardless of the result of the Referendum there should be public insistence on Holyrood to use its powers to tackle Scotlands need.

Yeah, right.

This is the inconvenient truth for the nationalist cause I am afraid.

 

Your complete dismissal of the point highlights that perfectly.

[billco98]

This is the inconvenient truth for the nationalist cause I am afraid.

 

Your complete dismissal of the point highlights that perfectly.

 

Nationalist cause? I am not a nationalist. A large proportion of those intending to vote YES are not nationalists.

 

This referendum is about the future governance of Scotland - it's about the governance of the people who live in Scotland being in the hands of those people.

 

OK - to address points in Jambos are go's post:

 

1) Holyrood has tax raising powers it declines to impelment. Yes it has the ability to raise some tax in a limited way but without the full gambit of tax raising powers across the range it does not have the means of correcting and balancing outcomes.

 

2) Its headline policies on council tax and student fees gives benefits to the better off and a change could release funds to tackle this issue. The Scottish government is mitigating a large proportion of the cost of the freeze in Council tax by diverting funds for other areas. Holyrood currently depends on its funding from the Westminster allocated block grant which has been cut in proportion to Treasury budget levels.

 

3)Holyrood and local councils are happy to see social problems concentrated (or ghettoised in) certain locations like Carlton in Glasgow( the source of the headline figure) I pressume you mean Calton? No-one wishes to see social problems contained in ghettos other than those who might wish the problems swept under the carpet and out of sght. The current Scottish government certainly is not happy with the current situation and to suggest otherwise would be beneath contempt. One of the driving forces behind the drive for independence is to be able to tackle those problems and solve them - not just leave them out of sight and out of mind. Too many on the NO side are doing just that and are seemingly happy to do so.

 

4) Holyrood also has control of huge spending on Health and it most certainly has the tools to do the job. The health budget has been cut in line with spending cuts made in NHS spending south of the border with large cuts still to come in the pipeline. Holyrood can only maintain current levels of spending by making savings elsewhere to compensate. To suggest that Holyrood has 'huge spending on the Health and it most certainly has the tools to do the job' is at the very least disingenuous. Until we have the total package of fiscal powers at our disposal those problems can only be tinkered with.

 

5) Regardless of the result of the Referendum there should be public insistence on Holyrood to use its powers to tackle Scotlands need. Jeezo - give me strength.

Edited June 10, 2014 by billco98

[jambos are go!]

Nationalist cause? I am not a nationalist. A large proportion of those intending to vote YES are not nationalists.

 

This referendum is about the future governance of Scotland - it's about the governance of the people who live in Scotland being in the hands of those people.

 

OK - to address points in Jambos are go's post:

 

1) Holyrood has tax raising powers it declines to impelment. Yes it has the ability to raise some tax in a limited way but without the full gambit of tax raising powers across the range it does not have the means of correcting and balancing outcomes.

 

2) Its headline policies on council tax and student fees gives benefits to the better off and a change could release funds to tackle this issue. The Scottish government is mitigating a large proportion of the cost of the freeze in Council tax by diverting funds for other areas. Holyrood currently depends on its funding from the Westminster allocated block grant which has been cut in proportion to Treasury budget levels.

glasgows

3)Holyrood and local councils are happy to see social problems concentrated (or ghettoised in) certain locations like Carlton in Glasgow( the source of the headline figure) I pressume you mean Calton? No-one wishes to see social problems contained in ghettos other than those who might wish the problems swept under the carpet and out of sght. The current Scottish government certainly is not happy with the current situation and to suggest otherwise would be beneath contempt. One of the driving forces behind the drive for independence is to be able to tackle those problems and solve them - not just leave them out of sight and out of mind. Too many on the NO side are doing just that and are seemingly happy to do so.

 

4) Holyrood also has control of huge spending on Health and it most certainly has the tools to do the job. The health budget has been cut in line with spending cuts made in NHS spending south of the border with large cuts still to come in the pipeline. Holyrood can only maintain current levels of spending by making savings elsewhere to compensate. To suggest that Holyrood has 'huge spending on the Health and it most certainly has the tools to do the job' is at the very least disingenuous. Until we have the total package of fiscal powers at our disposal those problems can only be tinkered with.

 

5) Regardless of the result of the Referendum there should be public insistence on Holyrood to use its powers to tackle Scotlands need. Jeezo - give me strength.

 

1. If it has the power to vary taxation then it clearly has the power to correct and balance outcomes.

 

2. If the Scottish Government can mitigate the cost of the council tax freeze by diverting funds then it can surely undo that and re-divert the freed funds to tackling Glasgows problems. Similarly it can end free tuition fees for the better off and re-divert the savings to Glasgows problems

 

3.You seem in the know according to this response. Pray tell what the Scottish Government are doing to tackle ghettos and poor health record associated with them. Nicola Sturgeon is a Glasgow MP and was Health Minister for 5 years.

 

4. The Health budget including normal inflation was and is ring fenced by Westminster IIRC correctly the last Labour Government at Westminster trebled Health Spending when it was in office. Health Service inflation is normally higher than normal inflation but the contention that Health Spending has been cut is nonsense.

 

5. Empty rhetoric .

[jambos are go!]

On point one are you saying we should raise more tax per head for the UK exchequer and we should then pay extra tax to the Scottish Government to supplement the Block Grant? Really? I mean do you actually believe that is what we should be doing?

No. I was responding to a YES poster who seemed to think we need to do something about the UKs huge and rising debt. I said Holyrood need not wait to begin that process and bring forward austerity measures. I would not. If Holyrood raised Income tax levels then it would get the revenue, not the UK Exchequer, and the block grant would not change. It would be new money for Holyrood to spend.