Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Drink Driving, Don't Risk It!

Holyrood in line to get new powers over tax

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 June 2009
THE biggest change to the way Scotland is governed since devolution began has been proposed, with the recommendation Holyrood takes control of a large part of the country's income tax revenue.
The Scotsman can reveal that the main recommendation from the Calman Commission is to hand over half the income tax raised in Scotland to the Scottish Government.

Significantly, Prime Minister Gordon Brown has suggested he is "very warm" to the proposal, hinting that the recommendations have a strong chance of being enacted.

With the basic rate of income tax at 20p, the change would give Scotland control of the second 10p. This would allow MSPs to vary the tax rate – up or down – by as much as they choose.

Crucially, part of Scotland's budget, which currently comes in a block grant, would then fluctuate, depending on income tax revenues.

This change, known as fiscal accountability, means a successful Scottish economy would lead to larger revenues. Conversely, if there were fewer people in work, this would lead to a drop in the budget.

The proposals would replace the current "tartan tax" – which has never been used – under which income tax can be varied by up to 3p in the pound.

The tax plan – the most significant proposed change to the devolution settlement – will be the central plank of a report to be unveiled by the Calman Commission on Monday.

The body was set up last year by Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives to investigate the way forward for Scottish devolution.

Even under a Conservative government, many analysts believe the tax change could be enacted, as David Cameron is keen not to be seen as anti-Scottish.

It also seems unlikely the SNP would oppose the idea of giving Holyrood greater control of income tax, even though the party was opposed to the commission, which it believed was set up to counteract its own National Conversation. While the proposal falls far short of what the Nationalists want, it will be quietly welcomed by much of the leadership as part of a gradual progression towards possible independence.

The new tax proposals have reportedly delighted the Liberal Democrats, who have been led on the commission by former deputy first minister Jim Wallace. They see it as the first step in devolving income tax powers down to councils and improving local accountability.

The changes would mean that on current figures £9 billion, including income tax, business rates and council tax, would be raised directly in Scotland, representing 35 per cent of the total budget.

On the current basic income tax rate of 20p the UK government would get 10p, while on the higher rate of 40p the Treasury would get 30p. It would also take 40p of the 50p top rate being introduced by Alistair Darling.

The Scottish Government would have the ability to raise or lower its 10p share of these rates by as much as it liked, as long as it had approval from MSPs.

However, any change in one rate would mean that all three would go up or down by the same amount. This is an attempt to stop the Scottish Parliament from putting all the tax on the higher bands and reducing the basic rate.

The rest of Scotland's budget would come through a much-reduced grant.

A source close to the commission said: "These proposals provide stability, not as much as we have now, but still they do not allow for any wild decisions in Holyrood."

In terms of other taxes, including VAT and corporation tax, the commission is to recommend that they remain unchanged and reserved to Westminster.

However, the commission will recommend that the issue of assigning all tax raised in Scotland is considered in the future, although this would not mean giving Holyrood the ability to vary the different rates.

The Calman Commission was set up last year on the back of a proposal by former Scottish Labour leader Wendy Alexander. The idea was to counteract the SNP's National Conversation on independence, which was being run through the Scottish Government.

Members of the three unionist parties got together in Holyrood to vote on setting up the commission, and the proposal was then endorsed by the Westminster government.

The commission, chaired by Sir Kenneth Calman, the chancellor of Glasgow University, was specifically told to exclude discussions about independence and, rather, look at ways of strengthening Scotland's position within the Union, while improving on devolution.

It membership included representatives from business, trade unions, the media and the law, as well as the three political parties.

As well as financial matters, it has also looked at devolving other powers, including broadcasting, airgun control and drink-driving.

'Would MSPs have nerve to use extra power?'

THE idea of handing over control of much of the income tax raised in Scotland to Holyrood appears to be a great boon for devolution.

But looking below the surface, the apparent increase in power to MSPs, if the recommendation is accepted by Westminster and Holyrood, could prove an uncomfortable gift. On the one hand, MSPs would seemingly have a large amount of power over the Scottish budget. But on the other, the question has to be asked: would they have the nerve to use it? The history of the tartan tax variable rate of 3p in Scotland, accepted by the Scots in a referendum, shows it has never been used.

MSPs have had no stomach to explain why Scotland should be the highest-taxed part of the UK, or why hundreds of millions should be lopped off public spending to fund a tax cut.

The Liberal Democrats bravely tried to propose a 2p tax cut this year, using these powers, and were shouted down, mainly because it would have led to a £700 million loss of funds.

It is this unwillingness to change anything that may explain why the more conservative elements of the commission are happy with this proposal. But one aspect that should not be ignored is the way that this will reopen the door for the controversial local income tax by giving Holyrood far more control over devolved taxes.

Those who saw a property-based local tax as a source of stability may get a nasty surprise if MSPs use these new powers to replace that with a new income tax.

Scotland on Sunday's Tom Peterkin is online now and taking your politics questions.

Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 11 June 2009 1:32 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: The Scottish Parliament
 
1

,

10/06/2009 22:05:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

Jerry Springer,

10/06/2009 22:08:54
What a worrying development.

I would not trust the MSPs in Holyrood to organise a raffle, never mind preside over more extensive tax raising powers.

They were incapable of even drawing 4 teams out of the hat for a semi-final of the CIS Insurance Cup. They managed to turn that into a farce so imagine what they could do with our taxes.
3

druidh,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 00:10:26
I thought it was going to be too difficult / complex / costly to have different tax rates in Scotland and RumpUK? At least that's what the IR said when the flat-rate council tax replacement was proposed......
4

subrosa,

11/06/2009 00:17:41
This all smacks of a parent giving a child a rise in pocket money.

Stop this nonsense and let's deal with the whole of our financial affairs.
5

john z,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 00:19:19
Is it not freakin' obvious, that without independence, the easiest solution is full fiscal autonomy. I would rather trust the Scottish parliament to be more accountable in their decisions with Scots money than the dirty corrupt midden called westminster.

As it goes, Scots will now getting the delight of getting to keep half the tax money they pay, kept in Scotland. What utter nonsense. All these silly silly schemes and variations on Schemes. Piffle.

Full fiscal autonomy. Simple. No schemes, no calculations. Oh and think of the money we'll save the day we stop paying for the westminster gravy train.
6

john z,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 00:24:42
Dear Gordon Brown,

Thanks for letting us Scots keep a wee bit of our own money for ourselves. We promise to come to england once a year with our begging bowl on our knees, to ask for the rest of it back.

In the meantime, feel free to squander Scotland's oil money on any whimsical project you see fit.

Yours grovellingly and on its knees

Scotland.

7

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 00:28:55

Yes!, one needs the power to have the power on tax, afterall who knows what mad project they will need to raise the tax for next!
For Example: Paining the Scottish Parliament 'Pink'!
For Example: Forget the Trams, hows about a 'waterway' for boats, for our next Public Transport System?

Aye! One Wonders!

8

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 11/06/2009 00:29:29
If they are willing to give us 50% of tax revenues, then why not 100%.

Of course one thing Maggie Brown wouldn't be "very warm" is giving Scotland the Revenue from Scottish Oil. And I don't thing Cameron would be either.
9

Iainbroch,

11/06/2009 00:35:20
Calmans, Liebores and the Tories minging red herring. This paternalistic patronising nonsense from the we know best Unionists is offensive and insulting!
10

Allan(handofgod137),

11/06/2009 00:36:11
Ah, the tartan tax, a missed opportunity to help Scotland's economy by reducing taxation.
11

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 11/06/2009 00:36:18
2 Springer

And you trust our incorruptable MPs at Westminster over taxation? Let's see now.. a fxxx-up over abolishing the lowest rate of tax last year, the highest (regressive) fuel duty taxation in living memory, and enough stealth taxes to bail out RBS.

Calman is playing games. No one will dare vary Scottish taxes. If they were raised, the Scottish public would go mental. If they were cut, the UK Government top-up contribution would be cut. Full fiscal accountability is what is needed. We have enough MSPs to shoulder this additional, but natural responsibility.

However, if this indeed does go ahead, and Cameron introduces English-only votes for English legislation, WHAT WILL SCOTTISH MPs DO AT WESTMINSTER??
12

frank mcbride,

lusitania 11/06/2009 00:36:21
This is no change from what we have now.

The ability to use this power is a chimera if the SG does not have the power to vary the tax bands asymetrically.

It is a con for the consumation of the public.

Without, at least, FFA any changes in the funding mechanism is smoke and mirrors.

BTW, I didn't notice that David Maddox was a member of this commission. I wonder why he got the scoop!!!
13

Edward,

11/06/2009 00:42:09
Let me see, its a choice between Scotland remaining in the Union with England and getting to keep HALF of its Income Tax revenue OR Full Independence, dissolution of the Union with England and keeping ALL of it Income Tax, Corporation Tax, VAT, Duties, Excise and Oil Revenues?
Hmmm difficult one that!
Nope, still like the idea of FULL INDEPENDENCE!
14

Edward,

11/06/2009 00:43:34
By the way just how did David Maddox get the scoop on this?
Oh thats right, straight from a breifing from Labour to coincide wth Brown's so called reform anouncements
15

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 11/06/2009 00:47:02
7 Charles

How about a ring road for Aberdeen? Or upgrading the A9? Or a £7.50 national wage? (Or is that Glasgow just using up the spare cash they get from the Scottish Government?) How about capital investment in Sustainable Energy projects that will create future wealth, or how about building a couple of schools that we won't be paying for three times over until 2040, under PFI??

I'm sure your waterway thingy, however important, can wait.
16

Proud Flower of Scotland,

Dumfries 11/06/2009 00:49:06
Of course, Brown likes it. He wrote it.
17

Barney Thomson,

Reading 11/06/2009 00:51:35
"This change, known as fiscal accountability" - er, no

".... means a successful Scottish economy would lead to larger revenues" - but without an increase in the block grant fed by the other 50% of the increased revenue. Half a pie?

My dog likes his dinner but it is usually better constructed than this one.
18

Fifi la Bonbon,

11/06/2009 00:56:45
I am sure that people of all political affiliations and none will welcome this good news heartliy and without bitterness or rancour, and without trying to engage in banal one-upmanship.
19

Wisnaeme,

11/06/2009 01:02:01
.

Discredited Westmidden con merchants at it again.

After what's transpired over the years, who's gonna believe them?

Not me, that's for sure.

Would you buy a pig in a poke frae that place.

Naw, me neither. Besides, there's a glut of snouts for sale on open display, doon yon way.

So why buy wan in a poke?


.

20

Barney Thomson,

Reading 11/06/2009 01:02:59
I see no reason to accept that this lot of guff, lacking details of the overall health of the base economy and the long term cost to all of us of the emergency measures undertaken can be seen as good news.
21

frank mcbride,

lusitania 11/06/2009 01:07:13
#19, Fifi........

I thought that paraphrasing the Great Westminster Leader was the prerogative of David Maddox.
22

Scottish and Proud,

Glasgow 11/06/2009 01:13:52
".... means a successful Scottish economy would lead to larger revenues"

I doubt it ,Westminster would just cut our pocket money.
This is merely another Unionist sop to slow down Independence.
A message to AS , tell them all or nothing!!!
23

hoblar,

11/06/2009 01:22:44
I think we can make our verdict on how good the tainted calman 'suggestions' are when we get to hit the ballot boxes, and we may have a few dozen other reasons. (like the tories being in westminster, acting at least as kak handed with Holyrood as new labour have proven to be determined to do, the economic mismanagement at westminster, corruption, nukes, nuclear energy etc)

The powers needed for Scotland will eventually be the choice of the Scottish people, and the worry for Westminster is as always Independence, a viable possibility and one that has more than enough popularity to have been considered if the calman commission wished to seek the best for Scotland and what the people wanted.

The calman commission were far to scared to dare investigate the option of Scottish Independence, and that is a fact.


24

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 01:40:43

Andrew ~16,

Yes I Know!, But Unfortunately, I do not have say on How Tax Revenue is spent.
As we must all realise, if we have control on our "Taxes", It will become 'Silly-Money', Just used for none the benefit for Scotland, but for the Benefit, to further some of our grotesque 'Silly Policies', that prevent Scotland from ever becoming Independent.

25

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 01:48:39

None the Daft!, For Manipulation!

"Give a inch, and they will take a Mile"

'Give a Tax-Power, and never become Independent'

'Give a Tax-Power, to Hang-ones selves'

26

bill inch,

EDINBURGH 11/06/2009 02:09:16
#13 grant iDont pay another higland freeloader
27

donald,

glasgow 11/06/2009 03:03:05
You could not trust Westminster to calculate "Half" of Scotland's tax. They'd fiddle even that.
28

Jo Flo,

slept mostly 11/06/2009 03:10:36
There are people from other parts of Scotland apart from Edinburgh

29

Jo Flo,

todo bien 11/06/2009 03:26:57
Holyrood in line to get new powers over tax.

Oh halleluyaa, no-one in my life has ever given me teaching of tax or anything to do with tax

What does it mean "new powers" over tax?



30

Willie Mor,

11/06/2009 03:46:18
If Scotland wants to take control of it's financial affairs then it will do so, without reference to this monkey's hogwash.

Unionist placeman with a unionist agenda is about the best you can say about Mr Calman.
31

Advance Alba,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 04:23:02
So what do we get for the 50% London keeps of OUR money? Illegal wars, preposterous posturing to maintain the pretence of being a world power, or subsidising egocentric projects for London? Will Scots get a referendum on these proposals? It's OUR money! Scots don't want pocket money, they want independence of running our own affairs in the interest of Scots.
32

Bruce DeVenne,

Halifax Nova Scotia 11/06/2009 05:14:12
Be careful. The experience here is Canada is that every time a level of government gives some power of control over taxation to a lower level the upper level also adds costs that they down load but the tax rates at the upper level stay the same and the extra money is raised through higher taxes at the lower level. It always sounds good when the spin doctors work it up but in the end it may well be just London shifting costs onto you along with new powers so local government can raise taxes to cover it. remember London is looking for every cent they can get to pump imto that super big economic black hole called the Olympics.
33

suileandubh,

OZ 11/06/2009 05:22:42
the only significant change since devolution would be independence. let's look forward to the election and say fare thee weel tae yon sassenachs
34

dunedin bully wee 1877,

11/06/2009 05:39:51
From The Times 28/10/2008

“However, it was the reaction of HMRC to the claims that it could oversee the collection of the tax that will most disappoint the Nationalist government in Edinburgh.
In an official statement, HMRC said: “Scottish local government finance is a wholly devolved matter, collected by the local authorities. HMRC has not been involved in the preparation of any proposals by the devolved administration.”
Privately HMRC officials went farther and one senior source said: “This is pie in the sky. The logistical arrangements for collecting this tax would be incredible.
“Introducing changes to the personal allowance in September took months and months and this could take even longer.”

What has changed now to make the collection of this “Scottish” tax any easier?

I suspect I can see a kite flying over there.

35

Colin Wilson,

Aberdeen 11/06/2009 06:54:11
"The changes would mean that on current figures £9 billion, including income tax, business rates and council tax, would be raised directly in Scotland, representing 35 per cent of the total budget."

The current figures are simply invented, in a way that allows the UK to claim that it "subsidises" Scotland. Currently, the UK's Inland Revenue compiles no specific figure for the income tax that it collects from us. Similar observations can be made about business tax and VAT.

Are UK institutions prepared to start keeping specific totals for Scotland?
36

McNasty,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 07:04:31
Labour at Westsinister will only release their grasp on Scotland when the people here wrench it from their greedy hands.
That time cannot be far away the way things are going in that sick parliament.
37

Indy Evolution,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 07:37:32
Well that's just proved what we expected anyway - the Calman Commission has failed Scotland. Hopefully, the people who were expecting more from it will now vote for the party who can deliver more. Why do we want to keep getting belittled by unionist politicians. They're taking the mickey.
38

The Answer,

Glasgow 11/06/2009 07:39:52
If 50% of income tax raised in scotland is reserved for scotland and not part of barnett, then 50% of income tax raised from rest of UK should be excluded from barnett when calulating future handouts from the English to the scots!

Hopefuly this will help scots males enter the job market in greater numbers , because at this moment in time and with 1 in 4 scots working (less than 1 in 5 in England) in the non productive public sector , male unemployment in scotland is higher than in England
39

Phil C,

11/06/2009 07:47:52
We need all our income tax kept in Scotland and corporation tax for that matter. The oil revenues could then fill the gap. Of course we're told that we'd still be short, so then we could get a hand-out or be thrown out of England. They say we can't afford to go it alone. Let's try!

Simpler still Scotland could give up being part of England.
40

David MacVicar,

web 11/06/2009 07:49:48
Yes, Holyrood is indeed in line to get new powers over tax. Just not in any form the Calman nursery team have gamed up.

Fiscal autonomy (devolution for responsible adults) is the absolute minimum, together with additional devolved powers to make it work, like Energy.

The only serious alternative is independence, where we decide what joint ventures we have with the rump UK.
41

Son-of-scotland,

East lothian 11/06/2009 07:50:51
They must think we are really stupid (ps. jerry , no onecares what a bitter Englishman thinks of scotlands business)
its our money, they know that the people are gonna see it, and they are trying to divert our attention, we wout seetle for less than full independence,

Nationality, finantial control, freedom to teach our chrildren there own history, and not british lies,

thig ar latha , very soon, get used to it jerry,

a courty with our industry's and a population of about 8 billion , compaired to 80 billion, what have you got to sell, its a joke to think people beleive we cant pay for ourselves, and that we are the ones being subsided.
42

letmein,

hinterland 11/06/2009 07:55:13
When is this paper going to realise that the Calman comission is a load of gob shoite, and the Scottish people know the underlying meaning of it.
43

TWC,

exLabour 11/06/2009 07:58:39
Only Maddox could see this as significant, it is an attempt to Fob off the Nats and they will need a bigger stick.
This is all an attempt to keep control of Scotlands finances in Westminster and all the Holyrood parties should stand for far greater control at Holyrood before the GE.
44

Advance Alba,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 08:00:11
Will we get a referendum on these constitutional changes under the new Brown-led reform of government accountability?
45

thinking,

Scotland 11/06/2009 08:27:08
How many working age Scots are in productive employment that brings in new money?
According to reports a large number are unemployed.
More than half the working population work for local or national government, education and NH etc that just recirculate tax payers money.
So, with limited numbers bringing in new money, there will gradually be less and less for the Scottish Executive to use. What happens then?
46

brianmca3,

auld reekie 11/06/2009 08:32:39
well if we got cash that was not counted like london gets
londons civil service jobs,are not counted by westminster as gov spending in london ,that includes mod dept of culture,foriegn office etc
museums institutions that are classed as national resources arent counted as gov spending in london
national gallery gets £26 million a year
£45 million a year to natural history museum
£45 million goes to british museum
national museum of scotland which the gov doesnt count as its classed as being only for scotland gets £15 million a year (oh what a surprise there eh)
london underground new tube line cost £3.5 billion thats 3.5 times what the cost of a new bridge over the forth in scotland,or less depending what is chosen
scotlands entire transport budget is £2.3 billion and covers one third of the land mass of the uk
so we see who really are the subsidy junkies yes westminster feeds billions into london and sod the rest of the uk citizens
no wonder scots are wanting away when all our tax money and oil revenue seems to be proping up england,and to add insult bank of england was established by a scot bet hes spinning in his grave
so before you whine about scots again remember we gave the world the tv the phone tarred your roads,bicycles,etc etc
well pay us the royalties on tv and phone alone i wonder just how rich we would be
47

HughB,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 08:38:25
This meaningless "commission" has been running for how long, and how much has that cost us?

Sounds like another mission for the Telegraph. Eh?
48

BIG EYE,

Paisley 11/06/2009 08:45:42
This is a very dangerous argument for Unionists to pursue.

I presume unionists believe Scotland is subsidised by England and that the Barnett formula is over generous to Scotland.

They must despair at how complicated all this is.

Yet here we have the Scottish Government advocating full independence with Scotland keeping Scotland's wealth and England not paying a penny towards Scotland's upkeep. No cross charging, no identifiable and non identifiable expenditure, each keeping their own assets.

Yet what side of this argument do we find the Unionists on?. On the side of continued confusion of course, not for them genuine accounting through independence or even full fiscal autonomy no they prefer to continue to beleive in the myth that England keeps us afloat and panic at any suggestion that might reveal the truth.

The amazing thing is they can't understand why they are losing the argument!

Independence Now...vote SNP
49

The End Is Nigh,

Highland 11/06/2009 08:48:03
WOW, thanks for nothing Calman Commission, and how long did it take you come up with this pearl?

What a waste of time and money. This proposal is totally unworkable and would obviously leave the Scottish Government with powers they are unable to exercise, frustration and fights between Holyrood and Westminster to follow. Oh Joy!

Enough of this dross from people with no authority, lets just wait until after the next election or two and see what the people have to say on the matter.
50

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 08:48:25
#50 HughB

According to the National Conversation, Scottish tax revenue should be gathered through levies on pearl mining operations in the polar regions of Mars.
51

thinking,

Scotland 11/06/2009 08:52:40
#49
London is only part of England.
Population of England approx 51 million
Population of London approx 8 million
Population of Scotland approx 5 million
Population of Edinburgh approx half a million
So, who gets the biggest percentage of money for their national museum? Edinburgh, by a big margin!!!
52

ExpatJockanese,

Tripoli 11/06/2009 09:00:38
*Please enter your comment*
53

Boab1,

11/06/2009 09:04:03
#2 Jerry, don't worry yourself too much. It's all part of trying to convince us we can't run ourselves. Yes the draw was messed up and it made all the news programmes. The exact same thing happened for the FA cup draw a week or two later but it hardly made any news at all. Wonder why.
54

ExpatJockanese,

Tripoli 11/06/2009 09:04:35
I wonder if one half of Scotlands taxation income is worth more or is on par with the 30 billion taken in from the Barnett formula? If so then it shows how much Scotland subsidies the rest of the UK and if not then this is a massive cut in income to Scotland so how does this assist Liebours chances in Scotland?
Just a thought any comments from the kiddy on unionist scotsman staff posters?
55

dunedin bully wee 1877,

11/06/2009 09:05:20
54 thinking,(?)


The National Museums in Edinburgh are funded by the Scottish Government.


What is your point caller?
56

AJ Fife,

11/06/2009 09:09:16
Will Broon be in power long enough to implement his latest 'hair brain' scheme?

Mind you, if he succeeds with his proposals to rig the next General Election, he might just be able to continue his programme of 'bawzed up' reform bills!
57

Tartan Viking,

11/06/2009 09:10:35
But no control over oil revenues.
58

ExpatJockanese,

Tripoli 11/06/2009 09:11:46
41

Isnt this new hair brained scheme a replacement for the Barnett fiasco? so how does your moronic post apply to anything?
59

puskas,

East kilbride 11/06/2009 09:13:12
As a number of posters have mentioned.. "It seems many labourites have Thatcher tendencies"...

Freedom as a nation is not about money..

Freedom to run our country independently as we wish with what we have at our disposal. Making decisions to suit our nation (Scotland) across the board with no idiotic placemen, similar to clown spud in the background.. to laugh at.

Anyone wishing to argue against an Independant Scotland could be relying on the discreditted union for benefits associated closer to the DWP. Maybe they should get off the ars* and realise that all who bide in Scotland should work towards a much better country free from the yoke that is London. Whether black, brown (not the other), yellow, white, and no matter what religeon, or non - et al

60

mr broon,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 09:20:56
Surely Calman cannot be serious!

Its highly unlikely that Devo-Max fiscal powers will ever be devolved to the Scottish Parliament?

The United Kingdom is already a quasi-federal state but any further shift towards placating the Scots with fiscal autonomy, and preventing a further upsurge in Nationalism verges on a State in waiting?

A Provisional Scottish Government!
61

DAVID,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 09:21:29
Brace yourselves then........taxes in Scotland are heading one way, and that's upwards.
62

ppink,

11/06/2009 09:21:47
Con
63

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 09:26:47
This Calman rubbish is a complete and utter FARCE.

64

noswod,

Honestas 11/06/2009 09:31:17
Aye now fre the big yen. Gee the SNOP control over the money. It will make the Bankurptancy of the twa banks look like a Church fete. Under the present system we get £33bn plus aboot another £15bn frae WhiteHa which keeps oor little country aFloat as we disney have industry or commerce left up here aw flogged off and proceeds bank in a tax free account. Wit will happen is that the SNOP's will gee aw everything tae try and win a referendummy on independence. Will the Scots buy it probadly yes giee the Scots free booze in the water supply and they will vote frae anything. WIthin twa years we will be bust just like 1707. I say lets keep the existing system O free cash flowing along otherwise you'll a better to start tae speak Icelandic as we will be as broke as they are.
65

Faux Cul,

Sangatte Holiday Camp 11/06/2009 09:31:20
I didn't see anything in the article about oil revenue, or is this too early in morning for me?
66

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 11/06/2009 09:37:01
"The proposals would replace the current "tartan tax" which has never been used under which income tax can be varied by up to 3p in the pound."

I think this statement is inaccurate.
67

Rosscobhoy,

11/06/2009 09:39:06
This has to be one of the most ridiculous ideas i have ever heard. All or nothing is the only way it could possibly work.
68

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 11/06/2009 09:40:20
This is good news if true.

Also, if we get control over broadcasting, we should immediately set up a "Scottish Six" news programme.
69

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 11/06/2009 09:41:38
71 Rossco

Which would you personally prefer? All or nothing?
70

Jacqueline Hyde ,

On the shelf 11/06/2009 09:42:14
Well over 30% of Scottish income tax is gathered through tax offices located in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and it is this homologation of revenues which has prevented the application of Holyrood's so-called tax varying powers.

Although I more than welcome the Calman recommedation, I'm yet to be convinced that the Westminster Treasury and HMRC can be persuaded to reorganise their systems to enable either this proposal or the powers contained in the Scotland Act to be implemented.

However it is also essential that corporation tax should also be devolved - a point frequently reiterated by Salmond - but, under current procedures, this would be even harder to untangle from the rest of the UK.

Surely the whole tax system is @rse about t1t? Scotland should be in control of it's entire taxation income (including VAT and excise duties) and make a grant to Westminster instead of vice versa.
71

ExpatJockanese,

Tripoil 11/06/2009 09:45:34
74

Will Scotland gain or lose out with the new proposal? Is half of Scotland taxation more than or on par with the income from Barnett? if so then havent we been subsidising the rest of the UK since the 70s? and if not why should we welcome a massive cut in income? Isnt that political suicide from a party already on the brink?
72

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 09:53:23
noswod,Honestas 11/06/2009 09:31:17

Your writing style is as ludicrous as its content.
73

TWC,

exLabour 11/06/2009 10:17:12
49 brianmca3,I worry about taxes, I've never paid tax in scotland, I always py in Southampton as do most peole emplyed by Multinational companies.
Will Scotland get that money. I agree with you about the clarid=fication of Spend.
I do believe that transparency on all Civil service spending plus Fiscal autonomy would be sufficient to allow Scotland to run well as a business and thrive.
74

JimC,

Kilmarnock 11/06/2009 10:24:52
Fifty percent of a dwindling tax receipt due to an increase in unemployment. All other revenue streams excluded and the 50% comes with conditions, is this the best Calman could come up with? Even the village idiot can see this is a cut in revenue in real terms. Fiscal accountability is not possible with one hand tied behind your back.
75

thinking,

Scotland 11/06/2009 10:26:06
#58
Read #49 to understand my response
76

The Strategist,

11/06/2009 10:28:27
Well at least Aberdeen can be assured of ongoing economic growth. It's planning to build a new park in the middle of Union street .......

Ho ho ho.... ha ha ha..
77

Sedov,

11/06/2009 10:34:48
That's the way to do it!

A step forward - but we don't want or need so called independence!
78

,

11/06/2009 10:34:59
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
79

Nevsky;,

Moscow 11/06/2009 10:52:16
83 Hagbard*

These figures are completely worthless and so is the argument!

The figues are based on Scotland WITHIN the UK and take no account of how a Scottish economy would have developed post independence and for the past 30 years!

Absolute waste of time basing any argument on this nonsense!
80

,

11/06/2009 10:53:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
81

ExpatJockanese,

Tripoli 11/06/2009 10:54:51
83

What I see is government propaganda the same propaganda garbage that gave us WMDs in Iraq, unemployment figures, immigration figures, inflation figures, NS oil revenue figures proved false by the McCrone report etc etc etc.
Is there any reason why these figures should be any more trustworthy than all of their other discredited figures and lies?
82

ExpatJockanese,

Tripoli 11/06/2009 10:55:58
83

Not to mention their lies on the public debt figures. Or maybe you have another credible non government affiliated source?
83

ExpatJockanese,

11/06/2009 10:56:45
84

Which is what staff trolling is all about.
84

ExpatJockanese,

11/06/2009 10:58:23
83

Actually Scotland is entitled to 95% share in the oil and gas fields not 83% another unionist myth.
85

ExpatJockanese,

Tripoli 11/06/2009 11:00:44
83

Anyway youre bullsh*t argument only begs the question as to why is the Scottish grant being cut? and in the middle of a resession too? do you honestly think thats a vote winner for Brown then?
86

Chris42,

11/06/2009 11:03:54
"The new tax proposals have reportedly delighted the Liberal Democrats, who have been led on the commission by former deputy first minister Jim Wallace."

Tavish Scott recently stated publicly he wanted SP to have control over a "basket of taxation" so how on earth can he be happy with this? Humiliated more like.
87

TWC,

exLabour 11/06/2009 11:06:26
83 Hagbard Celine,

Never mind the old arguements people will never agree since McCrone and ALBA programmes it has been obvious tha Scotland needs t control its own finances.
That could be Fiscal Autonomy or Independence; my preference is Fiscal Autonomy but all these manipulated taax things are all biase toward Westminster control.
Giving control toHolyrood removes the arguements since we collect everything ourselves and contribute an agreed amount /percentage for those issues we agree should be reserved.
Lt's start again and make sure it is set up in a way that is clear and understandable.
If we don't have enough money then we will have to cut services and benefits to suit;not call on Westminster to give us more pocketmoney.

Fiscal Autonomy or Independence -- Simples
88

TWC,

exLabour 11/06/2009 11:11:29
91 Chris42,

I agree the Libdems must be embarassed, their inactivity on Scottish Policies and finance have been noticed. We are back to the old liberals promising everything but no substance. They should support the referendum now and take some responsibility.

The referendum would make all parties at Holyrood to declare their position on Financial Control

I mini Devolution, Full Fiscal Autonomy or Independence.
89

ExpatJockanese,

Tripoli 11/06/2009 11:11:59
92

Fiscal autonomy without independence? so we remain within the UK but dont contribute to it? aye no doubt the rest of the UK would go along with that right enough. We are either subject to the UK or we are not there is no middle ground.
90

TWC,

exLabour 11/06/2009 11:21:42
96 Hagbard Celine,

Are you SMee
91

ExpatJockanese,

Tripoli 11/06/2009 11:25:04
96

Yeah yeah yeah dead ground its been done to death this one. According to UN international maritime law 95% of all UK North Sea oil and gas assets fall within Scotlands maritime borders. And the so called commissioned report wasnt compiled by the SNP but by the westminster controlled civil service which has been pointed out every time youve come up with this garbage in your various staff troll account logons.
And that is a fact.
92

frank mcbride,

lusitania 11/06/2009 11:26:23
#75, Jockanese.

The reaal con of this proposal is that Scotland will not receive 50% of its IT.

It will receive:

50% of the 20% band
25% of the 40% band
20% of the 50% band.

According to Calman this will account for 35% of the current SB. What percentage of the current SB would a genuine 50% share reflect?..........

+/- 50%?

What, then, about NI, VAT, Corpoation Tax, Excise Duties, Oil Revenues etc.?

This is a smokes and mirrors attempt by Westminster to stem the tide of Independence.
93

KB,

Glasgow 11/06/2009 11:27:02
The UK government this year expects £7billion in revenue from North Sea Oil. Last year they took £13billion.

Of course it's beyond Scotland to do the same as Norway and generate a budget surplus nationally as a small country, investing oil money in pensions etc.

I mean we've only got better natural resources than them. Oh wait a minute.

The UK government does the square of nothing to develop resources and the Scottish Economy.

It's quite evident to anyone with a modicum of intelligence that once independant we will need to restructure and invest in our economy, however anyone that tells you we'll spiral into poverty and debt is an idiot.

Scotland has excellent natural resources that it can develop in addition to Oil - we could sell water to the continent for a start!

Those who talk of being broke like 1707 conveniently forget that the English put us in that state by denying us access to their markets, the new world and europe through use of their navy. That won't happen now.
94

ExpatJockanese,

Tripoli 11/06/2009 11:27:26
95

Ah Troll then the figures and stats didnt originate from Government sources then? they actually were derived from the "taxpayers alliance" how on earth did they manage to collect them and from who?
95

frank mcbride,

lusitania 11/06/2009 11:30:49
#81, Sedov.

Read my #99 and tell me how this is a step forward.

Also, as I said, in an earlier comment, this is a position of "no change" from what we currently have.

It is smoke and mirrors!!!
96

Mikey,

11/06/2009 11:41:03
#103, you're showing your cringe. So what if the report on the seabed was created post 2007 by Scottish civil servants? Are you saying that you'd rather believe anything coming out of London?

If so, why do you live in Scotland? It really must be hard for you, being the supposedly superior person you are?
97

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 11:42:23
#104 Hagbard

And Norway doesn't have to hand over it's revenues to the EU. I don't see a 'Netherlands Gas Fund' anywhere.
98

thinking,

Scotland 11/06/2009 11:50:03
Isn't it about time everyone forgot about what has been or might have been.
No-one can change the past or work out for sure what could have been - it's all speculation.
Living permanently in the past achieves nothing
We need to go forward and work with what is now, not what might have been.
99

bluehead,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 11:55:05
I smell a rat here!!!and ,let's face in the world of politics there are plenty to choose from,you can bet your last penny that what is suggested will not be what it seems
politicians have a peculiar odour about them,so be mighty wary when any such dubious idea are banded about
it will not be for the benefit of the people ,that's for sure!!!!
100

,

11/06/2009 12:04:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
101

Tartan Viking,

11/06/2009 12:11:56
#117. Who's Iain Gray? Is that a photo of him beside the above headline?

#118. You better hope we don't get full control of all our revenues or you'll be out with the begging bowl.
102

,

11/06/2009 12:16:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
103

Sedov,

11/06/2009 12:21:48
#117 blah blah, It is the sign of very poor polemic when one ( ie you!) have to resort to personal remarks about someones appearance. Is it beyond your ken to say something sensible?

For example I would never say that Alex Salmond appearance looks like he's been living off the greasy products of a chuck wagon vendor and he is fat and ugly.

No, I would say that Salmond is short on economic and social solutions for Scotland and long on rhetoric and false promises.

Get the picture?
104

The Master,

11/06/2009 12:27:09

The block grant funding of the SP worked smoothly when Labour were in power, but the new proposals of Calman are the only sensible response to the Nat tactic of moaning about a block grant which is, in real terms, twice what was available to Dewar.

I wish equality amongst all the constituent parts of the country and feel that this is a sensible and workable way of redressing the balance.

119.shut it!

105

Mèths,

11/06/2009 12:28:01
"why should the people of England give you Scots 20 billion a year!"

To pay back the money you've stolen from us?
106

Tris,

11/06/2009 12:30:00
You either have control of the finances or you don't. Control over a small part of the income tax is no use. You need to be able to vary taxes up and down in accordance with need and financial situation, but balance that with other taxes like VAT, corpration tax, death duties, local tax, etc.

Everything still depends on London here.

Let's just have total independence.

#117. Berero: It amazes me that faced with a wide range of failings in the Labour Group Leader, you would chose the one thing which matters not one jot to Scotland, and in any case is something he can do little about. If you want to put down Labour, an easy job, surely you can do better than that.


107

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 11/06/2009 12:36:53
Taxation is a very complex matter and I dont think the Calman commission has sufficient expertise to suggest any simplistic solution.

Income tax is particularly complex in that many living in and working in Scotland have a Tax Office in an other part of the country. It would require all Scottish Employers to be dealt with by Centre 1 and all self employed by a Scottish Tax Office. It would be a bureaucratic nightmare trying to determine the Scottish share of Income Tax under the present arrangements, or would HMRC make a guestimate and could that figure be trusted. And as many small businesses operate through the Corporation Tax system it would seem all the tax paid by them would go to the treasury. And what is the point of the Calman propoposal as it still does not address the point that those spending money should also be responsible for raising it. This would still be a UK matter with no real say by the Scottish Government in setting the rate.

This seems the worst of all worlds. - A complex Tax calculation offset by a reduction in the Barnett allocation, and not even a fair ascertainment of the economic activity of the country. Only the collection in Scotland of all the tax revenues with a forward payment to the UK exchequer based on population share for those costs that are met by the UK government, such as defence, benefits/pensions, and foreign affairs, is appropriate for true fiscal accountability.
108

Linda,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 12:37:13
The GERS report for 2006/07 showed that Scotland was in SURPLUS £0.8 billion (0.7 per cent of GDP) including an estimated geographical share of North Sea revenue (based on average Brent Crude price of $67).
109

frank mcbride,

lusitania 11/06/2009 12:37:23
#125, Sedov.

I'm still waiting for your reasoning as to why you believe that this Calman solution is a "step forward".

Would you care to enlighten me (us)?
110

,

11/06/2009 12:38:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
111

Electric Hermit,

11/06/2009 12:38:57
7
Charles Linskaill

"...who knows what mad project they will need to raise the tax for next!"

Not launching murderous illegal wars.

Not stockpiling weapons of mass destruction.

Not privatising profit while socialising risk.

112

ExpatJockanese,

Tripoli 11/06/2009 12:41:22
111 Maddox

You still havent explained how a 137 billion GDP relates to less income than the 30 billion handout from Barnett. Please feel free to show the math.
113

frank mcbride,

lusitania 11/06/2009 12:43:37
#126, The Master.

Could you enlighten me as to why you believe that this Calman proposal is a "sensible and workable way of redressing the balance".

Would you, indeed, let us know how it will work?

Will the SG, actually, be getting 50% of the Scottish Tax (IT) take?

Will the SG have the ability to vary IT asymetrically?
114

ExpatJockanese,

Tripoli 11/06/2009 12:45:43
108

You of course forgot to mention that the southern north sea resource is predominantly Gas not oil and Scotlands share of the OIL resourse is over 95%.
And of course the UN international maritime law puts the 95% of the entire oil and gas resourse into Scotlands maritime borders and all of the contrived trolling bullsh*t cant get around that fact.
115

Electric Hermit,

11/06/2009 12:45:47
"The rest of Scotland's budget would come through a much-reduced grant."

It is not a "grant" it is repatriation of PART of the revenues raised in Scotland.

The Scottish Government must control Scotland's finances. It can then pay a "grant" to Westminster for whatever services might still be provided at rump-UK (RUK) level.

116

,

11/06/2009 12:49:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
117

Electric Hermit,

11/06/2009 12:50:18
19
Fifi la Bonbon

"...without bitterness or rancour, and without trying to engage in banal one-upmanship."

Why would anyone want to emulate Iain Gray?

118

Sedov,

11/06/2009 12:50:52
#131 FM - Any reform( such as the Calman report) that could give the people more say in how they spend and use their money is to be welcomed but must be explained in the context that it is given - ie it can also be taken away, unless it is controlled, owned and improved upon by the tax payer.

Thus only a socialist planned society with, for example, the communities of Scotland in a democratic fashion, determining how the money gets spent, under strict accountability, can the fiscal system be called democratic.

The SNP would not consider that kind of control by the people, as they, like all the other parties, want a centralised fiscal system controlled by burocrats.

The above answwer may be too radical for the SNP and you -but it is my opinion as to the way forward.
119

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 12:52:10
I think the simplest solution is to admit that Holyrood has been a failure for Scotland, tell the electorate the truth, and let the electorate decide whether or not to scrap it.
120

Mèths,

11/06/2009 12:56:32
"Scotland is a wee country with 5.1 million inhabitants,of which 2 million are in employment."

I assume you can give us a breakdown of how many NOT in employment are pensioners, schoolchildren, babes-in-arms etc etc.

You pull figures out of a hat but leave them floating in mid air. Pretty meaningless really - like most of your posts.
121

Observer,,

Glasgow 11/06/2009 13:01:27
141 Your posts are becoming ever more eratic and bizarre are you feeling alright ?
122

,

11/06/2009 13:05:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
123

Mèths,

11/06/2009 13:06:29
Hmm - addition to 142

"The Scottish employment rate stands at 75.4 per cent and continues to be above that of the UK and almost all countries within the EU."

Scotsman 22 April 2009
124

Mèths,

11/06/2009 13:08:05
146

erm it's the employment RATE you should be looking at - not counting people below working age and retired people.

Sheesh.

Read 146.
125

Mèths,

11/06/2009 13:08:38
For 145 obviously!
126

frank mcbride,

lusitania 11/06/2009 13:09:07
#140, Sedov.

Wouldn't you, then, concede that the Calman proposal is just more of the same; that it is, indeed, "smoke and mirrors"?

Would you, not also, concede that the devolution of LA budgets to the LAs, themselves, is a "step forward".

Would you, not also, also agree the the SNP Government can only progress the accountability, that you desire, in an incremental way, given the constraints of the Scotland Act 1998?

Finally, given your stated position, would you not agree that the only way forward, in the teeth of Westminster intrangency, is Independence?
127

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 13:12:42
#144 Observer

Over it's 10 year history, Holyrood has achieved little, and cost a great deal. Why should it be taken for granted?

If Scotland had been run out of the Scottish Office, they could probably have implemented hard decisions for the betterment of Scotland instead of the stupid freebies from Holyrood.
128

,

11/06/2009 13:15:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
129

frank mcbride,

lusitania 11/06/2009 13:18:00
#141, Tin Man.

I agree with your last sentiment, "let the electorate decide".

Glad to see that you agree with most supporters of Independence. Let's have a Referendum sometime within the next 18 months.

Do you wish Government to return to Westminster? YES/NO

Do you wish the Scottish Government to negotiate Independence? YES/NO
130

,

11/06/2009 13:19:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
131

,

11/06/2009 13:20:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
132

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 13:20:54
#152 frank

Unfortunately, I cant see politician giving the electorate the option of getting rid of politicians.
133

frank mcbride,

lusitania 11/06/2009 13:22:49
#151, nova albion.

You may like to consider the possibility of Scotland rejecting membership of the EU in favour of a Norway type arrangement.

If the terms are not right, the people of Scotland would have it in their power to reject the EU.

Everything will be up for consideration in the transition period.
134

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 13:24:36
nova albion 2,11/06/2009 12:49:10
states:-

"127. Oh please,give it a rest. Scotland is a wee country with 5.1 million inhabitants,"

Scotland area = 78,133 square kilometres with 5.1 million population. 117th largest country in the world.

England area = 130,422 square kilometres with 51 million population. 97th largest country.

Scotland is nearly two thirds the size of england with one tenth the population.

England is grossly overpopulated and is getting worse every year.

The fact that England is also a small country but with too many people does not bode well for your future.

Does it Kimba?
135

Geomac 1,

Scotland 11/06/2009 13:28:13
Yet another bunch of politicians to be given the power to dip into our pockets - heaven help us!!
136

frank mcbride,

lusitania 11/06/2009 13:28:21
#154, nova albion.

I see from your reply that you are very astute, politically.........and as a statistician........and in debate.

Perhaps I should bow to your "planet-sized" cranial superiority!
137

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 13:29:21
#154 nova

Why do you laugh? Westminster has a better record on education, and health then Holyrood.

#156 You have the right to reject the EU, right now, should you wish to.
138

frank mcbride,

lusitania 11/06/2009 13:39:55
#160, TTM.

Please explain your reply to my #156.
139

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 13:43:34
nova albion 2,11/06/2009 12:49:10
states:-

"127. Oh please,give it a rest. Scotland is a wee country with 5.1 million inhabitants,"

According to the UK Abstract of Statistics:- Scotland's population will rise from 5.1 million to 5.3 million in 2031.

England's population will rise from 51 million to 60 million in 2031 (THATS SIXTY MILLION).

Where are they going to put everyone?

140

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 13:44:36
#161 frank

????

You can vote for an anti-EU party. It would be the same process in an indy scotty - no-one's going to give anyone a referendum on membership.
141

,

11/06/2009 13:48:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
142

,

11/06/2009 13:49:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
143

me150,

11/06/2009 13:51:02
I think they should give the Scottish Government FULL tax raisning powers just to show how much of an asss they would make of it.

Once Scotland gets this power there is a real danger that the handouts from Westminster will stop then we would be in a right hole.
144

,

11/06/2009 13:54:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
145

,

11/06/2009 13:57:12
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
146

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 13:59:22
nova albion 2,11/06/2009 13:54:53

You are also St George.

Who is also the patron saint of England, skin diseases and syphilis.


147

frank mcbride,

lusitania 11/06/2009 13:59:45
#166, me150.

It is very enlightening that you profess to wish the worst for Scotland.

Are you, perhaps, a member of NuLabour?
148

Brianwci,

11/06/2009 14:00:24
Westminster is being dragged inch by inch towards the obvious, fiscal autonomy.

They will give as little as they think they can get away with and that will have every possible string they can attach to it.

Having said that, it looks a reasonable certainty that the decision will be taken out of their hands at some point over the next 23 months.
149

S.M.D.,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 14:00:55
What a load of non-sense this whole proposal!
It just means, that London government keeps the most of our tax and gives much less back to Scotland.
It's day light robbery!
Time for Independence!
Time for oil revenue stays in Scotland!
150

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 14:01:41
nova albion 2,11/06/2009 13:57:12
"166. At last,a scot with a brain."

This creature is no more Scots than you are - Kimba!
151

,

11/06/2009 14:06:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
152

Geomac 1,

Scotland 11/06/2009 14:08:08
Childish dogma seems to rule in this blog!!
153

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 14:13:10
166 The "hand outs" from Westminster are part of the taxes which Scotland contributes to Westminser being returned (but short changed).
We dont get back all of what we contribute .If you dont understand how the country is governed why tell everybody about it?
154

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 14:14:02
168 How would you know?
155

InThePark,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 14:17:02
"Ridicule over 'vote Labour' plea"

http://tinyurl.com/lw5jsp

Most amusing, its not very pro labour, so we can assume that's why its not been reported here.

156

,

11/06/2009 14:19:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
157

Alathea,

11/06/2009 14:20:59
Brown reminds me of the little Dutch boy with his finger in the dyke. While the seas of change start to mount higher and higher behind the wall, all Brown can do is issue petty little titbits designed as a stop-gap to appease his dwindling band of 'brothers'.

And what about the oil revenue? Unless this is included in any fiscal autonomy plan, my reaction would be tell Brown to stuff it...
158

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 14:27:06
151

The European parliament would offer oil rich Scotland terms at least comparable to the current UK settlement,since to do otherwise would clearly be rejected by Scotland.
A lesser membership simply cannot happen !
The EU would never be so stupid as to offer terms of entry which were obviously totally unnaceptable, and whilst some negotiation would no doubt arise,it seems inevitable that an agreement would come into being,since nobody is a member of anything against her wishes,as the UK is about to find out.

So are you!
159

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 14:33:54
179 He is excellent value for money Gogs .Im still laughing on the Wednesday of the following week !
160

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 14:36:53
morris,edinburgh 11/06/2009 14:27:06

From the suppressed McCrone report 1974:-

"North Sea oil could have far-reaching consequences for Scottish membership of EEC because of the tremendously increased political power it would confer. Without oil other members might pay little enough regard to Scotland; her voting power would not be large and it might indeed be argued that she could exert more leverage on the Community as part of the United Kingdom. As the major producer of oil in Western Europe, however, Scotland would be in a key position and other countries would be extremely foolish if they did not seek to do all they could to accommodate Scottish interests."


Not only more than double the number of MEPs but Independence will give our country massive influence in Europe and therefore all the advantages that go with directing policy for Scotland's benefit.
161

,

11/06/2009 14:41:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
162

me150,

11/06/2009 14:43:01
Yes my opinion does not go with the majority but that does not make it wrong!!

Scotland is subsidised by the UK government and no amount of patriotism can change that fact.

Oil rich Scotland, where?

The oil is the UK's oil and don't you think the government will hand any of it over because they won't.
163

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 14:43:06
#183 Joburg

You mean that Scotland would give more money to the EU to build Bulgarian motorways, then?
164

,

11/06/2009 14:43:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
165

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 14:45:46
183 Cheers Johannesburg (the city where you can travel to Kempton Park on the M1) Duidelijk !

I was semi-aware of the contents in that I have heard reference to this before ,but I have never read it as in it was in front of me in black and white.
I have now, for which I express my gratitude. Keep up the sterling work !
166

,

11/06/2009 14:45:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
167

,

11/06/2009 14:46:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
168

,

11/06/2009 14:53:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
169

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 14:57:05
Hagbard Celine,11/06/2009 14:39:30

From http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2008/06/20103720

"Statistics show Scotland in surplus
20/06/2008

The Scottish Government today published the Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland report (GERS).

Including a geographical share of North Sea revenues, the GERS figures show Scotland with a current budget surplus in 2005-06 and 2006-07.

In 2006-07, Scotland's current surplus is estimated at £837 million, or 0.7 per cent of GDP. This compares with a UK deficit of £4.3 billion, or 0.3 per cent of GDP."

I suppose it all depends on how you want to present or misrepresent it EH!.

170

The Scotchman,

11/06/2009 14:57:56
McCrone Report

- "The country [Scotland] would tend to be in chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree"

- "its [Scotland] currency would become the hardest in Europe, with the exception perhaps of the Norwegian kroner"

- "it is easy to imagine England in dire straits without it."

Who knows what other classified documents exist. Right now there is top secret documents with Brown saying the same stuff. You know it!
171

,

11/06/2009 14:58:59
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
172

,

11/06/2009 15:00:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
173

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 15:00:31
The Tin Man,11/06/2009 14:43:06
#183 Joburg

"You mean that Scotland would give more money to the EU to build Bulgarian motorways, then?"

You have a talent for "extremely obscure" questions.
174

Electric Hermit,

11/06/2009 15:01:09
163
The Tin Man

"You can vote for an anti-EU party. It would be the same process in an indy scotty - no-one's going to give anyone a referendum on membership."

The EU Constitution provides a clear mechanism for secession. Can we expect that you will be in favour of adopting the constitution?
175

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 11/06/2009 15:02:00
What the Calman commission fails to grasp is that taxes cannot be looked at individually but must be examined in their totality.

Example Say the Scottish Government decided to reduce the income tax rate by 10% across the board.

This would cause the Treasury to dock Scotlands allowance by an equal amount. The Scottish Government would have to reduce services by that amount or borrow to make up the difference.

The Government employees cut would now go on the dole until they found work, which would be unlikely since the private sector is loath to hire those that have worked in the state sector. There reduction in lifestyle would mean decreased spending, which would lead to lower VAT revenue , Lower fuel duty revenue and lower corporate profits for companies supplying goods and services these people once bought.

Now the people who got the tax cut would either spend or save that money. If they spent it it would mean increased VAT, increased fuel duty and increased corporate profits and new jobs created that would also pay tax.

If they saved or invested that might generate stamp duty, tax on interest, Capital gains tax or in the longer term increased Inheritance tax revenue.

The point is that just handing over the power to vary only one tax by 10% is a pretty useless gesture when you will continue to deny Scotland control over all the other tax levers and still be able to reduce the budget up or down at will.

Suppose the Tories get in and decide to cut spending on education and healthcare by 50% to pay off the UK deficit. Will this silly tax varying power shield Scotland from these unilateral cuts? No.

Without the ability to vary all taxes and revenue streams you have no control over your economic future. Having limited control over one or two is useless, and the Calman Commission knows this.

Fiscal Autonomy or go Foxtrot Oscar.
176

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 15:04:46
189

United Nations agreements resolve boundaries (martime)disputes as a straight line drawn at 90 degrees to the Coast line at the land border (ie slightly North of Berwick in this case).It can also use length of coastline , but that favours Scotland even more !
No doubt others could define this with greater eloquence and legal reference than I can,but I know it is correct.


That would be what would happen and the UK is a signatory to this UN agreement.
Of course until it actually happens it does not exist but tomorrow does not exist either,its still coming !
In 1968(or around 68 anyway) Westmidden divided the North Sea into Scottish and English sectors, and it is called The Continental Shelf Jurisdiction Order.
How Westminster could contest the legality of an Order they put in place is a trick which would entitle you to membership of the Magic Circle. Nevertheless they will probably try (unsuccessfully)because they would indeed lose 95% of the territorial water which contains oil but fare slightly better on gas possibly.Norway has the rest so Westmidden wont get that either !

What he refers to is almost certainly what WILL happen! You on the other hand are the one who cannot be correct and this has been checked with both UN and EU regularly with the same answer everytime. Scotland and Norway will have jurisdiction over the parts of the North Sea where the oil lies. What Westminster would retain is not worth mentioning!
177

The Scotchman,

11/06/2009 15:07:39
138 England is a wee country with 50,000,000 inhabitants versus Chinas 1,330,000,000 and India's 1,145,000,000. You lose.
178

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 15:09:41
186

International law says the UK ceases to own the oil when Scotland secedes and declares her independence so couldnt possibly hand it over since they will no longer own it in exactly the same way as they dont own Norways oil either !
You are talking absolute drivel !
179

,

11/06/2009 15:12:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
180

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 15:13:42
#199 Electric

Isn't the UK and Greenland the only EU members that ever held referendums on secession? Greenland didn't need to sign up to the EU constitution in order to leave.

What's your point, caller?
181

me150,

11/06/2009 15:14:44
#201 Ownership of the area does not determine ownership or right to the oil. Past investment will account for only one of, likely, dozens or more factors used to determine that right. Scotland will ultimately lose out in a big way.

To assume Scotland will be handed all rights and gains from the oil reserves is a foolish assumption that would put the Scottish government and economy into dire straits.
182

,

11/06/2009 15:16:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
183

,

11/06/2009 15:19:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
184

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 15:21:20
me150,11/06/2009 15:14:44

"Ownership of the area does not determine ownership or right to the oil. Past investment will account for only one of, likely, dozens or more factors used to determine that right. Scotland will ultimately lose out in a big way."

You are out of your depth and making this up as you go along to suit your previous statements.

Please stop now. You have no idea what you are on about and you are only displaying your lack of knowledge on this subject.

185

,

11/06/2009 15:21:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
186

Mèths,

11/06/2009 15:22:37
"YEP,poor old England,we kicked your ar'e at everything,and ruled India from 1858 to 1947"

Colonialist bampot.
187

Mèths,

11/06/2009 15:23:04
Add in elizabeth the first.
188

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 15:23:06
nova albion 2,11/06/2009 15:16:48

You on the other hand should keep this up, because you deserve the ridicule that you get.
189

Yeah1,

11/06/2009 15:23:31
#191

"Sorry love, but your nasty racist party just won't take root in tolerant Scotland."

It is great that Scotland does not have as many BNP voters as places like Yorkshire and NW England.

However now is not the time to get complacent - 27,000 Scots still voted for the BNP - an increase of 8,000 from the last Euro election.

You cannot dismiss the threat of the BNP in Scotland by saying 'we are okay because we don't have as many BNP voters as Europe'.
190

Nevsky;,

Moscow 11/06/2009 15:23:45
206 Me*

How do you know? Scotland would get it's fair share, no more and no less...hard to see England making a claim for Aberdeen and Shetland really!
191

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 15:25:47
206 Oil is owned by whoever owns it . Revenues are payable to the government who administer the section of sea under which they lie,That is how the UK has claim currently and why Norway has the rest.When Scotland leaves the oil is still owned by whoever owns it but the revenues automatically transfer to whichever government they are now in the waters of .

Some horse trading is inevitable of course, but you dont get a bean from Norway and the law regarding Scotlands North Sea is exactly the same as the law regarding Norways North sea, so its unlikley that Scotlands legitimate government will be any different.
192

,

11/06/2009 15:26:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
193

Nevsky;,

Moscow 11/06/2009 15:27:56
Everyone seems to forget the companies who will relocate to Scotland.

No need for these drilling, engineering, producing and every other companiies to have their HQs in London...business always prefers to be close to where the power is..so a fairly substantial jobs boost to boot!
194

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 15:33:30
214 Whilst your message on complacency is heard loud and clear,there is a clearly defined more left wing attitude in all Scots and parties like the BNP simply would not gain a hold in Scotland.
We are in the fortunate position of being predominantly against racism here, which really is the lowest life form on the planet.
Why do I say that ? Many reasons but heres two:

What is intelligent about a man who dislikes/hates someone because he has a better sun tan than he does?
Not only that but we save up our money and go off to foreign shores, spend all day on the beach and try to look like him ! For racism read stupidity.

Man tae man the world ower shall brithers be for a that!
195

,

11/06/2009 15:34:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
196

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 15:40:39
Nevsky;,Moscow 11/06/2009 15:27:56

Commerce will naturally gravitate towards the decision making centres.

With administration for licensing and collection of oil revenue moving to (probably) Edinburgh, Scotland will benefit immensely from the jobs that will be created, just like that other place, Is it NORWAY?

197

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 11/06/2009 15:47:24
#197 Nova Albion

"Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons have won seats in the European Parliament - but they do not represent Britain."

Yes they represent England, Scotland had nothing to do with them getting elected.

I don't know why you feel a need to apologize for their election. Almost every other European country has sent some far right ball bags to Brussels.
198

The Dark Side,

11/06/2009 15:50:01
#212 Meths: " Add in elizabeth the first."

Have you forgotten our dear old "vimto" moniker? Poor man's Irn Bru my a'se!
199

,

11/06/2009 15:50:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
200

Yeah1,

11/06/2009 15:51:38
#222

"Yes they represent England, Scotland had nothing to do with them getting elected."

If you look at it that way they actually only epresent Yorkshire and NW England respectively, rather than England as a whole.
201

,

11/06/2009 15:51:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
202

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 15:52:48
I was amused when I heard some people in the North of England saying They come here, can hardly speak the language and take us jobs!

If an English employer prefers to emply a guy just off a banana boat with a limited command of English in preference to say Burnley man,it does not say a lot for Burnley man!
People forget that if you were as thick as mince at school, the probability is that you still are!
I will never forget when the brother of a labour councillor I know said in reference to a Labour man, hes a" guid talker"

I had a parrot who was also a "guid talker",but I have no intention of sending either of them to represent me in Westminster!
203

dunedin bully wee 1877,

11/06/2009 15:55:40
210 nova albion 2

How are the “Beanos” getting on?

I do hope they survive as I usually do enjoy a wee trip through to Forthbank now and again.

My own club does not have its problems to seek but let’s hope that as many clubs as possible survive this current recession.

Oh! You don’t know what I’m referring to?

Is there some other “Albion” then?
204

brownlie,

11/06/2009 15:56:33
224 Rt Hon

If that is kimba, one of the children in the nursery must have spelt Nova Albion for her.
205

Tris,

11/06/2009 15:58:41
#160. Tin

In what way does it have a better record?

Can you show this with examples please?
206

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 11/06/2009 16:00:11
#206 me150

"Past investment will account for only one of, likely, dozens or more factors used to determine that right. "

Past investment was done by Oil Companies, not the UK Government.

The UK Government currently taxes those companies at twice the percentage rate on profits as all other sectors.

They don't care who they give the money too, only how much. If Scotland left their tax rates the same they would not bat an eye. If we reduced in slighlty they may well move their head office to Edinburgh from London and invest more.

So what other factors will come into play besides International Law?

The UK deficit?

The plummeting Pound?

The price of turnips?


207

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 16:06:27
#231 Kampung

Shell is moving it's HQ from London to Nigeria.

Why are safe crossing points on roads only available for zebras and pelicans? Protection should be made available to all animals.
208

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 11/06/2009 16:08:24
#224 RHFF

"KampungHighlander - kimba is apologising to make it look like she herself doesn't have racist views. She, of course, doesn't fool anyone but herself."

Are you sure its Kimba?

That sounds like someone trying to form some sort of strategy.

Something our friend Kimba is incapable of.

It would require that some of the brains higher level functions where working, from her past post it is a pretty safe bet that Kimba no longer has, if she ever did, those sorts of high level functions.
209

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 16:13:21
#230 Tris

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6237552.ece
210

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 16:16:13
#230

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6122746.e
211

Yeah1,

11/06/2009 16:19:47
#222

"Yes they represent England, Scotland had nothing to do with them getting elected."

Kampung - why do the BNP MEPs represent England but not Scotland?

They were not elected to represent England as a whole - they were elected to represent 2 regions of the 12 which make up the UK Euro regions.

They represent Yorkshire and the North-West - not the whole of England.
212

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 16:21:56
Should even more politicians be given the ability to raise even more taxation?

Why are we asking the question? A more pressing matter is the decimalisation of the calender, with the abolition of January and February.
213

Yeah1,

11/06/2009 16:25:30
Personally I am very pleased to live in the most tolerant, balanced and democratically and environmentally aware area of Scotland.

At the Euro elections, Edinburgh had the highest Green vote in Scotland, the lowest UKIP vote, the 2nd lowest BNP vote, and one of the most balanced divisions of the vote between the 4 mainstream parties. It also had one of the highest turnouts in Scotland too.
214

,

11/06/2009 16:28:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
215

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 11/06/2009 16:29:25
#232 Tin Man

"Shell is moving it's HQ from London to Nigeria."

If you knew anything about the Oil industry, which you obviously don't you would realize that Shell UK does to operate in Nigeria.

A Nigerian Corporation that Shell controls through a series of offshore Corporations is what they have in Nigeria.

It is also head quartered in Abuja.

Not the largest city, Lagos.

Not where the Oil is, Port Harcourt.

In the political Capital, Abuja.

Because for an Oil Company nothing affects the way that you are able to operate more than maintaining your relationship with the host Government.

With independence that relationship will take place in Edinburgh, not London and not Aberdeen.
216

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 16:31:29
"The report by John McLaren, who was a co-architect of the Scotland Act and advised the first two Labour administrations at Holyrood, claims Scotland’s once high-achieving education system has been particularly devastated by home rule, with standards falling behind those south of the border.

While Scotland’s health service had a poorer record than that in England and Wales in 1998, standards have now slipped even further behind.

The economy’s performance has also suffered under devolution, with Scotland’s output lagging behind England’s, according to the report.

t suggests public services may have been better had the Scottish parliament not been created and its powers remained at Westminster. “One can tentatively conclude that government being closer to the people has not led to improved relative performance in Scotland. In fact it may have had the opposite effect,” it states.” It says too many policies have been “about wanting to make Scotland stand out and wishing to be popular”.
217

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 16:32:15
238 It voted SNP for the first time ever also ,so Im pleased to record I live there also.
218

Am Fògarrach,

11/06/2009 16:32:27
#201 Morris -

Actually the border is the centre of the River Tweed at Berwick, not at Lamberton further north.

Scotland’s terrestrial border with England was fixed in the year 1237 by the Treaty of York, and even after the 1707 union it remained the boundary between two distinct and independent legal systems. It runs from the Solway Firth in the west to the mouth of the River Tweed in the east, mostly using rivers, mountain ridges and other natural features. There was a tidying-up agreement between the two kingdoms in 1552 on the largely featureless so-called Debateable Lands between the rivers Sark and Esk in the west, but otherwise the now completely definitive Scotland-England border has never been altered in almost eight centuries.

The UK government arbitrarily redirected the constitutional border: at 55°45’43.55”N–02°05’08.42”W the border line was redirected toward the north and subsequently east to the coast at 55°48'42"N–02°01'54"W near Lamberton. However, since it was not possible to alter the constitutionally fixed border at the mouth of the River Tweed by such means, the 1999 Order in Council, which tried to move the border to Lamberton, has no constitutional validity in this respect.

Recent disclosures in the London Times (see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article5728477.ece) show that this was a deliberate attempt to push the border as far as possible to the north in order to transfer 6,000 square miles of oil, gas, fish and mineral resources to the English jurisdiction just before the establishment of the new Scottish parliament and government, in order to keep them out of Scottish hands.
219

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 11/06/2009 16:35:49
242 If you wish to abolish the Scottish parliament petition the Parliament to introduce a referendum to allow us to do so.

Calman is a smokescreen, a wee bit of sweety money. More from the unionist school of this far and no further doctrine.

When the report is released I will read it, now the interesting question is about the HMRC.
220

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 16:36:46
#240 Kampung

Thank you. I was only kidding - Shell has no intention of moving it's corporate HQ to Lagos, or Aberdeen, for that matter. Likewise, BP will not be moving it's HQ to Alaska.

The Channel Islands are a far stronger candidate.

But what of road safety?
221

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 11/06/2009 16:38:02
#236 Yeah 1

I made the statement to illustrate the difference in support for the BNP between the 2 countries.

You are of course right, the people of Yorkshire and Northwest where in fact the ones that managed to give them enough support to send them to Brussels.

I stand corrected.
222

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 11/06/2009 16:40:48
243 I am amazed that in Fife the vote between the two was 0.2%
223

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 11/06/2009 16:42:18
246 Shell offer very good money to folk who are willing to work in Nigeria.
224

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 16:44:06
201 Fascinating !

Ill take your word for it, since you clearly are more learned on this than I am,(thats not very hard)but I must confess to having great difficulty in thinking of Berwick as being partly in Northumberland but still partly in Berwickshire. No wonder the townsfolk have two accents!
225

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 16:45:57
#249 Tormod

" Shell offer very good money to folk who are willing to work in Nigeria"

...Unsurprisingly...
226

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 16:46:37
250 is for 244 You really have confused me now!
227

brownlie,

11/06/2009 16:48:42
242 Tin Man

So Mr McLaren was an adviser to the first two Labour administrations. This could lead one to suppose that (a) his advice could not have been very good or (b) that Labour chose to ignore it.
228

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 16:49:11
#244 Am Fògarrach

Scotland's border is clearly displayed on AA roadmaps.
229

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 11/06/2009 16:50:16
251 Indeed the figure I was given was £22,000 a month with all the taxes paid by Shell.
230

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 11/06/2009 16:52:03
255 The Maritime border? Sorry to be geeky is that not a chart then?
231

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 11/06/2009 16:52:12
#241 Hagbard Celine,

Your numbers and statement do not take into account two very important factors.

1. Tax on the profits of the Oil Companies that operate in Scotland are include in London's revenue figures and not Scotland's. Since Upstream activity is the driver of Oil Company profits, 80% of what they currently pay as taxes on profits to Westminster would accrue to Holyrood.

2. The claim that Scotland runs a deficit would have more meaning if the UK Government ran a balanced budget or surplus. Something that they have not done in a long time. Any borrowing that the UK does on Scotland's behalf should be subtracted from those figures to give an accurate picture of whether Scotland would be borrowing less on its own or less through its share of UK debt.
232

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 16:52:45
#253 brownlie

Or...

c) The Lib Dems.

However, I personally believe it is because our MEPs are mostly a shower of nincumpoops.
233

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 16:53:54
#257 Tormod

Does that include the ransom?
234

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 11/06/2009 16:56:47
260 That's extra, you just have to hope that the former members of Lizzies SBS / SAS boat patrols are near to your platform with things kick off.
235

brownlie,

11/06/2009 16:57:08
125 Sedov

It would probably be pedantic to point out that you cannot "get a picture" of insubstantial things such as economic and social problems or rhetoric and false promises.
236

brownlie,

11/06/2009 17:01:01
259 Tin Man

They are probably not such nincumpoops(!) as to think that MEPs are part of the Holyrood Government.
237

morris,

edinburgh 11/06/2009 17:04:50
244 It would appear that he is correct, I.E.that the border as we know it,and the de facto border are not the same, and in terms of legaility of jurisdiction it is in fact right in the middle of the Tweed and whilst administration changes were made certianly, the legal jurisdiction is NOT at Lamberton but in the middle of Berwick !Fascinating stuff indeed.
This requires a lot more study!
I suspect it requires a greater understanding than I am confident of mastering also!
Im sure going to try though.
238

Yeah1,

11/06/2009 17:05:19
#261

"Sorry your not getting away with that, as far as im concerned the BNP have been elected to represent the UK in Europe"

Yes quite right - whilst technically their MEPs only represent Yorks and the North-West, in theory the BNP can be said to represent the whole of the UK, including Scotland.

They do not however only represent England and not Scotland, as Kampung was suggesting.
239

The Tin Man,

11/06/2009 17:05:27
#264 brownlie

:-)

Sorry, I must have gotten carried away by the thrilling EU election campaign. Did you know that two of Scotland's MEP's went pretty much straight for Uni to being MEP's? Lucky them...

I have no idea what our MEPs get up to, so I am in no position to accuse them of nincompoopery.
240

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 17:09:15
Hagbard Celine,11/06/2009 16:29:45
194

"Now go away and don't come back until you understand the difference between "current budget" and "budget including capital spending"."

The report goes on

"GERS also estimates Scotland's fiscal balance - which factors in capital and infrastructure investment for the nation's long term benefit. This also shows Scotland in a substantially stronger position than the UK as a whole. Compared to a UK deficit in 2006/07 of 2.3 per cent of GDP, the Scottish figure is 2.1 per cent - which equates to the OECD average."

As I said - I suppose it all depends on how you want to present or misrepresent it EH!.
241

Mèths,

11/06/2009 17:13:19
Where'd kimba go?
242

Mèths,

11/06/2009 17:18:44
271

Wiki?
243

Am Fògarrach,

11/06/2009 17:20:36
#255 The Tinhorn –

"Scotland's border is clearly displayed on AA roadmaps"
That doeesn't make it legal.

#265 Morris –

Thanks for your post. Sorry I confused you initially. A paper detailing Scotland's actual national land and sea borders is now in preparation. It will be fully documented and published on a new website, target date mid-July. Sorry I can't give you more details right now.
244

zeitgeist,

11/06/2009 17:32:28
These proposals are an utter scam as has been pointed out by many posters here. My question is this - given the importance of changes such as this, a) would the Scottish Parliament have any say in the proposals and b) would the Scottish people be given a say through a referendum? Given nulabour/broon's new found enthusiasm for democracy, the answer to both questions must surely be yes. Fiscal changes of the magnitude of those described in the article cannot be foisted on the Scottish people or their elected representatives without their full agreement.
245

brownlie,

11/06/2009 17:40:26
275 Lili bullero

More whacky than wiki.
246

Observer,,

Glasgow 11/06/2009 18:02:22
Smee how many times do you need to be told after the Union is dissolvesd we go back to the status quo as was before 1707.

It matters not a jot what happened after that. The border will revert to precisely what it was before the Union.

Although I imagine what will actually happen is that the people afected will be consulted on their wishes.
247

nova albion 3,

ENGLAND 11/06/2009 18:02:55
METHS. Where'd kimba go? don't know,but try that trick again you low life and i'll show you where nova albion will go!
248

nova albion 3,

11/06/2009 18:06:44
If and when the scots get some form of brain and realise that not everyone from England is "kimba,lia,maxi" then maybe we can have some kind of dialogue.
249

nova albion 3,

11/06/2009 18:08:47
279.Boll'cks!
250

nova albion 3,

11/06/2009 18:13:40
Don't like what i have to say, tough! what a load of cowards in scutterland, you'd rather have people banned than debate.
251

nova albion 3,

11/06/2009 18:17:05
Anyone has the b'lls to sign this
Signatures: 60,569

Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons have won seats in the European Parliament - but they do not represent Britain.

Sign our petition and help show what Britain thinks of the BNP - we'll be handing our petition to the European Parliament on the day Griffin and Brons take their seats. Join the campaign, upload a photo of yourself holding a sign saying "Not in my name" and then share this petition with your friends. Let's send a deafening message of defiance: NOT IN OUR NAME.
252

The Master 2,

11/06/2009 18:19:07
#291: good on you! Nationalism is the scourge of modern Britain (in all its forms!)
253

nova albion 3,

11/06/2009 18:19:10
Hope not hate is Searchlight's campaign to counter racism and fascism in elections and beyond.

With the election of Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons to the European Parliament, Hope not hate will be stepping up their campaign to fight racism and intolerance throughout the United Kingdon.

The BNP do not represent Britain – they hate everything great about our country. At Searchlight we want to make sure that people know the full story about the BNP. Join the campaign and help stop the BNP.
254

nova albion 3,

11/06/2009 18:20:31
HOPE not hate/Searchlight PO Box 1576, Ilford IG5 0NG | Telephone 020 7681 8660
255

Am Fògarrach,

11/06/2009 18:20:38
#271 Hagbard -

You state: "Yes. But the Union legislation did not specify or entrench the location of that boundary, so the subsequent UK Parliament could adjust it as it liked."

The boundary was specified in 1237 by the Treaty of York. That Treaty was NEVER rescinded or annulled. Therefore the Union legislation did not need to mention that boundary, since it remained in force.

The English Act of Union The English Act contains NO REFERENCE to the Church of England or Berwick. The Scottish Act, Chapter XXV, states, in part:

"Declaring nevertheless that the Parliament of England may provide for the security of the Church of England as they think expedient to take place WIHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE SAID KINGDOM OF ENGLAND and not Derogating from the security above provided for Establishing of the Church of Scotland within the bounds of this Kingdom. [emphasis mine]."

You said that "the subsequent UK Parliament [presumably you meant any UK parliament after the Union] could adjust it [the border] as it liked."

Got it yet, sm753?
256

Am Fògarrach,

11/06/2009 18:28:33
Re #295, sorry about the bad typing, but I was in a hurry. "The English Act of Union The English Act contains..." should obviously read "The English Act of Union contains..." and "WIHIN" should obviously read "WITHIN".
257

The Master 2,

11/06/2009 18:30:25
#293: there, we posted at the same time, so can't possibly be one and the same!

Another NatMyth "scotched"! Is the Master 2 right, or is the Master 2 right!
258

nova albion 3,

11/06/2009 18:34:07
297. Will it make any differance, not with a bunch of eejits like we have here.
259

Mèths,

11/06/2009 18:42:08
"METHS. Where'd kimba go? don't know,but try that trick again you low life and i'll show you where nova albion will go!"

Not me. I'd rather your posts remained so we can see what kind of poster you are. Look elsewhere.

260

Mèths,

11/06/2009 18:42:25
300 new powers?
261

nova albion 3,

11/06/2009 18:42:33
http://action.hopenothate.org.uk/standingup

Griffin won by just 1200 votes. He won because of the failure of the major political parties. He did not win through "new" support. He did not win a breakthrough victory.

Before the election, we feared the BNP would win 5, 6 or 7 seats. When the expenses scandal broke the BNP said that they would win 12 seats. But we stopped a breakthrough. please help stop the BNP
262

Desmo,

Lumphinnans 11/06/2009 18:44:17
Is your strategy for dealing with the "fascists" not a wee bit, erm, fascistic in itself ?

No truth in the rumour that Queen Betty hurriedly re-invited Nick Griffin to her garden party when she was told you`d applied for his ticket, is there ?
263

nova albion 3,

11/06/2009 18:46:12
This petition is just the start of our plans - we're already regrouping and planning the campaign ahead. We need everyone to play a role, however small, in the movement we are building to stop the BNP. This will mean us not just taking them on in the couple of weeks in the run up to an election - but day-in day-out - as part of our longer term strategy to defeat them every time their name is on a ballot paper anywhere in Britain.
264

Astonished,

11/06/2009 18:47:43
John Z @6 - worth repeating :

Dear Gordon Brown,

Thanks for letting us Scots keep a wee bit of our own money for ourselves. We promise to come to england once a year with our begging bowl on our knees, to ask for the rest of it back.

In the meantime, feel free to squander Scotland's oil money on any whimsical project you see fit.

Yours grovellingly and on its knees

Scotland.


















This is the absolute minimum mcCalman feels he can get away with. McCalman is the onionist's onionist - that is why he makes you greet.
265

Linoleum Blownapart,

11/06/2009 18:49:48
Master/albion - whatever

"there, we posted at the same time, so can't possibly be one and the same!

Another NatMyth "scotched"! Is the Master 2 right, or is the Master 2 right!"

He's wrong actually. I did this months ago - as you are now doing. Open up yer Firefox (or IE8). Open up Google Chrome (or Safari). You now have 2 scotsman articles in different browsers.

Write a comment on your Firefox (hold that POST COMMENT), write another in Google Chrome. Have both windows showing and you'll post roughly at the same time - depending on which browser is faster.
266

Mèths,

11/06/2009 18:49:55
Master/albion - whatever

"there, we posted at the same time, so can't possibly be one and the same!

Another NatMyth "scotched"! Is the Master 2 right, or is the Master 2 right!"

He's wrong actually. I did this months ago - as you are now doing. Open up yer Firefox (or IE8). Open up Google Chrome (or Safari). You now have 2 scotsman articles in different browsers.

Write a comment on your Firefox (hold that POST COMMENT), write another in Google Chrome. Have both windows showing and you'll post roughly at the same time - depending on which browser is faster.
267

Mèths,

11/06/2009 18:50:55
Gottit?
268

Sedov,

11/06/2009 19:10:45
#149 Frank - Ah wishful thinking from a well meaning NAT

You have to examine the class nature of the SNP which is a mainstream right of centre party which also advocates bourgeois nationalism - ie the nation state operating within a capitilast system -a system which is, incidentally, global and cannot operate without a global market economy as the Celtic Tigers of Ireland and Iceland ( both "independent" countries) found to their cost.

The SNP do not have a radical programme to tackle the unequal distribution of wealth that is causing the crisis of the economic system.

Stop wasting your time on the illusion that the SNP will make any fundemental difference to our lives -it won't.
269

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 19:33:37
Hagbard Celine,11/06/2009 17:11:20
244

States:-

"Yes. But the Union legislation did not specify or entrench the location of that boundary, so the subsequent UK Parliament could adjust it as it liked."

Yes the "subsequent UK Parliament" can adjust anything as it likes.

What an arrogant, pompous view you have.

270

Mèths,

11/06/2009 19:36:39
Sedov

"class nature of the SNP which is a mainstream right of centre party "

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Was that in yer pop-up book of politics?

No more on this. I may wet myself.
271

Mèths,

11/06/2009 19:38:18
Sedov

Is there Tenalady for men? I haven't laughed so much at a post since the good old days of Bangonthedoor.

Mañana.


ps


Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!













272

brownlie,

11/06/2009 19:40:25
321

Is "fish, barrel, bang, loser" your new signing-off moniker? I think I preferred "sm753" to a signing-off moniker which sounds like a confession.
273

frank mcbride,

lusitania 11/06/2009 19:45:31
#308, Sedov.

Every journey starts with its first small step.

With an Independent Scotland, we begin that new journey.

It is for everyone, even the cynics among us, to work for a better world; whining and whingeing is not enough.

I have seen, and been party to, the SNP changing from a rampant sectarian, right-wing into a social democratic left-of-centre Party.

There is NO reason to stick with the "state capitalist" fringes; the Soviet and China have proved that.

If you want a model, look at the reforming Sandinista Government of Nicaragua. The fact that the Neocons of the USA destroyed all the progress made does not take away from the Sandinista achievement.
274

Iainbroch,

11/06/2009 19:45:43
re225

You are forgetting that the BNP have some 60 councillors scattered around several English regions. London, Coventry, Essex, Sevenoaks, Burnley, Warwickshire, Leicestershire, Rotherham, Stoke on Trent etc. You have a complacent view of what has been happenning in England.
What happenned at Euros should have come as no surprise to anyone who has been observing with growing horror what is happenning down there.
275

Earman,

Paphos 11/06/2009 19:49:34
Forget all the bluster, distraction and desperate shennanigans currently on offer. All eyes on the endgame, my friends. To paraphrase Ray Bradbury, "By the Kicking of Some Bums, Something Brilliant This Way Comes".

Scottish Independence is now as inevitable as Christmas occurring in December. Maybe not this year, or in my lifetime, but it is INEVITABLE nonetheless.

Naysayers, "naw, we cannae" merchants, make hay now, for there will be no place in an Independent Scotland for so-called Scots who believe that EVERY OTHER NATION on God's Good Earth has the talent, maturity, intelligence and compassion to manage their own affairs and mind after their own people EXCEPT Scotland. How you can look at yourselves in the mirror simply escapes me!!
276

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 19:50:18
Hagbard Celine,11/06/2009 19:37:31

You shouldn't be wasting your time discussing things with all, here "who are not worthy".

You must set yourself up as a legal consultant on International Treaty, Law and Interpretation.

277

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 19:53:12
Hagbard Celine,11/06/2009 19:48:45

I beg your pardon.

What an accurate, arrogant, pompous view you have."



278

Observer,,

Glasgow 11/06/2009 19:53:55
Sedov - thanks that fair cheered me up.

Smee why do you persist in the error of your ways ? The Parliaments united - and they can be disunited. Westminster is not a superior legislative body. What Acts were in force before the Union have not been annulled or superceded.

We revert to the status quo as was before 1707. The Scottish Parliament resumes ALL its business again, not just a portion.

And with the border as it was in 1707 unless negotiated otherwise.

It's not difficult to understand.
279

Observer,,

Glasgow 11/06/2009 20:01:15
Smee 317 - ''are you claiming that all the laws and treaties passed by the UK Parliament ...will cease to exist''.

Of course not. How daft is that. All of them will apply to the rest of the UK and probably most of them will be attached to Scotland's legislative framework.

But issues such as borders which define the shape of two countries which made a union cannot be tinkered about with, what is perhaps confusing you is that Scotland is not establishing a new state here, we are just changing our minds.
280

Iainbroch,

11/06/2009 20:02:35
Dear Nova Albion 2

I am proud to write to you as your sterling service on behalf of the New England has not gone unseen. I wish to let you know that there will be an Iron Cross with Golden Oak Leaves waiting for you upon your return to the New Jerusalem. It is of course for actions above and beyond the call of duty in dealing with those barbarous sponging Scots.

I have noted that you done much to spread the fear of Scottish Independence amongst the cringing fearties. As you are no doubt aware we will desperately need those oil and energy resources to fund our military expansion plans. You are also no doubt aware that we will need all those empty glens to dispose of our nuclear and other toxic wastes. They will also make ideal locations for the resettlement camps when I have finally convinced the wavering ones in the Brit Establishment of the need for them.

You may return to my side and be my right hand in our new glorious Albion when the referendum has been either sabotaged or defeated.

Your Grateful Fuhrer Nick Griffin

Hail Griffin



281

Florence,

Edinburgh 11/06/2009 20:03:06
2 JERRY SPRINGER: That was botched by the Presiding Officer, not MSPs.
282

Observer,,

Glasgow 11/06/2009 20:03:27
Scptland won't have to declare independence it will merely need to notify the rest of the world it is reverting to the status quo.

Do you see ?
283

Observer,,

Glasgow 11/06/2009 20:16:41
''Now I'm bored with toying with you''

Someone has a rich inner fantasy life.........
284

Caora Dubh,

Croit sheasgair 11/06/2009 20:17:41
Yet again we Scots are being treated like bairns, being given a dummy to suck upon to gag our protests against injustice. The Calman Commission, which excludes the SNP, absurdly imagines that it can make us forget that we are being denied control of own oil, gas, distilling and other revenues, by fobbing us off with control of half of our own income tax. As if this were some great prize, giving a nation control over half its own income tax? Who do they think we are?! How DARE they treat Scotland as if it was some conquered little feudal fiefdom, HOW DARE THEY!

To the Unionists I have this to say: I will NOT be placated, and I will NOT be treated like a child. I am NOT stupid and my people are NOT stupid. We know exactly why you have not and will not allow Scots to count and use the revenue that their own country raises. Beware, Unionists, and be afraid, very afraid - my people are increasingly angry at the way in which our country is being robbed. The day is coming when you and your ilk will be judged. There is still a chance for you to be among the patriots, but don't dither. Tarry too long and you will forever be labelled a traitor.

285

Conan the Librarian™,

11/06/2009 20:20:08
327
Aw Hagbard, I've just arrived.

Any thoughts on the Sizewell A revelations?

I mean the Channel 4 Freedom of Information Act revelations.
286

,

11/06/2009 20:21:09
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
287

Ugly George,

11/06/2009 20:24:25
Nice pic of Lord Mandelson, with the 1969 Apollo 10 command module, helps underline his position in the grand scheme of things - I bet celine 753 is dead jealous.
288

Ugly George,

11/06/2009 20:26:19
He's a SFX maniac, you know.
289

Ugly George,

11/06/2009 20:29:19
753 Hagbard I mean - the other fellow is a deviant.
290

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 11/06/2009 20:39:08
Hagbard Celine,http://nat-mythbusting.blogspot.com/ 11/06/2009 20:10:24

states:-

"You think I sit here waiting for the replies of morons and loons?"

You are replying to "TheDisplacedGlaswegian,Edinburgh at 17:42:01

As I stated before - What an arrogant, pompous view you have.

By the way you still haven't answered my comments at 270.

291

hoblar,

11/06/2009 20:41:37
I see that a hopeless effort has come here under a new dafter name promoting his anti anything Scottish blog (going by the title)

His constant referrals to the daily record guide to unionism to make laughable comments about Scottish and british political history are as funny as anything.

Any numpty can vote unionist parties in and pretend that is a good idea, but the reality is that the union is a load of tired rubbish not fit for purpose, rather like their dwindling supporters commentary on political sites.
292

Ugly George,

11/06/2009 20:56:39
#330 Conan the Librarian™

These revelations?

Two years ago, a burst pipe inside the Sizewell A station led to a huge leak from the pond used to cool thousands of nuclear fuel rods.

Sizewell lies in Suffolk, on the East coast of England. If the nuclear fuel rods had caught fire, the resulting radioactive plume could have landed on villages from Southwold and Dunwich in the North, to Thorpeness and Aldburgh in the South, and inland to Leiston and Saxmundum.

SHlT happens - or in this case it didn't.
293

Ugly George,

11/06/2009 21:00:03
And even if it did, it would have happened in as close to the middle of nowhere as one can get in the SE.

Inspector Barnaby had everything well under control.
294

Alan B,

11/06/2009 21:11:29
The calman fiscal proposals are daft and probably unworkable.

We desparately need fiscal autonomy.
295

Ugly George,

11/06/2009 21:13:54
Southwold?

Isn't that where Sir Richard Bellamy MP and Lady Marjorie have their country estate?

Questions will be asked in the house.

I may even write a sternly worded letter to The Times.
296

Alan B,

11/06/2009 21:20:10
Tin man your argument is ridculous.

Scotland economy is run from westminster and fails as a result.

Scotland inherited a dreadful health record as a result of gross neglect of scotland and its problems.

Westminster maintained poverty in scotland causes much of scotland health problems and will take decades to sort out.

As for the record over government over the last 10yrs all you are saying is you support the premise englands labour was better than scotlands labour. Without the sp all we would have had is scottish labour doing the same thing.

But remember the shamble of westminster labour running our education system they could not even mark the exams.

Add to that the complete economc incompetent brown hardly it is hardly an advert for westmnster labour. Clueless on both sides of the border more like.
297

Ugly George,

11/06/2009 21:20:48
#339 Alan B

Who in their right mind would want the Fiscal's to be autonomous.

The law must be applied uniformly throughout the land, what you suggest would be tantamount to Anarchy.
298

Ugly George,

11/06/2009 21:26:05
Hudson!

Fetch me another brandy and soda.
299

Alan B,

11/06/2009 21:30:55
#UG

lol
300

Mèths,

11/06/2009 21:43:36
Sedov

Sorry. Can't help myself.


Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

(change of pants)


Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

301

Mèths,

11/06/2009 21:44:24
ps - don't flush a Tenalady - it blocks the pipes.

Oh well.
302

Mèths,

11/06/2009 21:46:02
Feria this week. San Antonio methinks. Bars open till 5:00am. Closed for an hour to mop up then open again at 6:00am.

I rather fear for my liver.
303

Mèths,

11/06/2009 21:47:12
Night all.

ps - Sedov said that the SNP were right of centre.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

(I am running out of pants)
304

Observer,,

Glasgow 11/06/2009 21:54:23
You are very cruel Meths I think Sedov is sweet - I haven't had conversations like that since I was at school.
305

Ugly George,

11/06/2009 22:24:16
#349 Observer

Sedov is stuck in a late sixties early seventies timewarp - he thinks he IS Alf Garnet's son in law, Mike.

Ironically Tony Blairs real life father in law - serves the so scouse Git right.
306

Observer,,

Glasgow 11/06/2009 22:45:36
350 I quite agree with Sedov's notion that wealth should be shared more equally.

But the working class are not particularly interested in class warfare or class based politics.

Those pesky proles ! The revolution could start tomorrow if it wasn't for them !
307

Observer,,

Glasgow 11/06/2009 22:49:19
Yeah Tony Booth - he got married to Elsie Tanner. There you go, now he was a working class hero.
308

Ugly George,

11/06/2009 23:06:11
#352 Observer

He would have been more of a hero - if he had married Ena Sharples.
309

me150,

11/06/2009 23:06:39
209 Do you 'REALLY' believe that the UK government has no investment in North Sea oil or gas?

If so then it is you who is out of their depth as future political debates will show!!!!
310

Observer,,

Glasgow 11/06/2009 23:16:09
353 A hero for masochists perhaps. Elsie was quite glam. I grew up admiring her hairdos.
311

Jo Flo,

walking on the wild side 12/06/2009 00:01:40
New Powers

Can't be bad

Less, I'd be greetin'
312

Jimmy Fae the West,

Hull 12/06/2009 00:21:21
It would be interesting to see how all unionist politicians now answer the charge of working against the Scottish interest? A poorer Scotland means a stronger union and conversely, a stronger Scotland means a much weaker union. Simples, innit?
313

Fletty73,

Stirling 12/06/2009 00:38:48
Scotland get's less money? London keeps the increasing oil revenues? Doesnae sound fair to me..
314

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 12/06/2009 03:03:51
#308 Sedov

"The SNP do not have a radical programme to tackle the unequal distribution of wealth that is causing the crisis of the economic system."

In my experience it always the ones who have no wealth that argue for its redistribution.

#327 Hagbard Celine

"The GERS calculations include corporation tax as well as royalties and PRT."

Yes, for Corporation Tax paid from a Scottish address. If the Corporation pays its tax from a London address, which all of the Oil Companies do, then it is not included in Scotland's figures.

"Fish, barrel, bang, losers, again. Now I'm bored with toying with you and I'm off."

What? Your not going to tell us that Scotland would be worse off after you subtracted Scotland's share of the UK debt from the GERS numbers?

I guess you did the calculation and found that Scotland would be way better of financially on its own.

Typical Unionist, all mouth and no trousers.
315

KampungHighlander,

12/06/2009 04:46:08
Calculation that Hagbard Celine does not want to talk about.

2006/2007
Scotland "DEFICIT of £2.7 billion" according to GERS.

UK Deficit £36.8 billion

Scotlands Per Capita Share £3.1 billion

Which means that in 2006/2007 Scotland would have been better of by £400 million.

316

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 12/06/2009 05:06:34
me150,11/06/2009 23:06:39
:-
"209 Do you 'REALLY' believe that the UK government has no investment in North Sea oil or gas?"

You remind me of the series that the "Viz" ran:-

"All your legal queries answered by - THE MAN IN THE PUB".
317

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 12/06/2009 05:19:20
Hagbard Celine (Smee) only quotes those lines that he thinks supports his illogical world.

He is not interested in what the entire source concludes, because he would, subsequently, have nothing to say.
318

Corrigan,

12/06/2009 10:00:28
To be considered an autonomous nation state,is it not about time that Scotland controlled its own fiscal policy? Many of us in England feel that this will be an important marker on your way to full independce and wish you well. Let us also hope that it will prove an important step in dismantling the discredited Barnett Formula which causes so much anti Scottish sentiment here in England.
319

langtonian,

uphall 12/06/2009 11:51:59
The Calman idependant report seems a positive way forward.
Devolution is a good idea,requering basic upgrading.
Holyrood politics are mired in "Steamie" indeed "sweetie-wifery,from all parties, which needs a boot up the "beehoochy" to move things on and ever upward.
320

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 12/06/2009 14:41:45
Corrigan,12/06/2009 10:00:28

Well said, Thank You


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
 


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.