tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post5912903801773230553..comments2024-01-12T01:56:21.933-08:00Comments on chokka blog: Mind the GapKevin Haguehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14587343060415859159noreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-63275869792050565922016-03-03T13:51:09.157-08:002016-03-03T13:51:09.157-08:00Have you considered helping out at The Samaritans?...Have you considered helping out at The Samaritans?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-14316478354693622252016-02-13T12:55:31.608-08:002016-02-13T12:55:31.608-08:00It's worth making the extra effort to listen t...It's worth making the extra effort to listen to the radio interview. I did, and it makes some of the comments above a bit puzzling.<br />To put it in a nutshell, Kevin Hague "owned" Stewart Campbell.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-88779897236195191512016-01-31T07:55:26.339-08:002016-01-31T07:55:26.339-08:00Grendal, you seem to spend a lot of time and energ...Grendal, you seem to spend a lot of time and energy defending Stuart Campbell, Nicola Sturgeon et al and the statements they made during the referendum campaign on the basis that oil prices and revenues are difficult, if not, impossible, to predict. It seems that because no one was completely accurate, their assertions pre-referendum are immaterial considerations seen in today's light and that the statements they make to defend them in recent interviews are legitimate and watertight. Aside from everything Kevin and others have pointed out which shows that the forecasts in the White Paper were significantly LESS accurate than others, even if they were themselves wrong, would you not for a moment consider it a more sensible option, given Scotland's near-term fiscal future depended to an extent on how people interpreted its contents, for the White Paper to make very little of the contribution of oil to Scotland's future revenues, as they are indeed too hard to predict. Then voters could assess the more 'stable', predictable aspects of Scotland's economy and potential fiscal position post-independence and genuinely consider oil to be a 'wee (or potentially big) bonus' on top of them? Instead, oil was a critical part of the prospectus! A major gamble on a volatile source of revenue, wouldn't you say?!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-74639307716873926802016-01-29T02:57:22.904-08:002016-01-29T02:57:22.904-08:00David and Caius, just to add that Scotland didn...David and Caius, just to add that Scotland didn't vote for FFA, any more than it did for independence. So Westminster would have been doing a lot of people who voted to stay in the union a huge injustice to impose FFA on them unilaterally. However, were I PM I would certainly make a pre-separation "trial period" of five years' FFA one legal condition (among others) to any future referendum on independence, with the Scottish government of the day obliged to publish in full its fiscal and economic management plans for the FFA period, plus clear economic criteria for both success and failure, before any question is put to the voters. RocohamAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-52979807935468281182016-01-28T23:56:36.559-08:002016-01-28T23:56:36.559-08:00To Caius Marrius. I cannot answer for David Camero...To Caius Marrius. I cannot answer for David Cameron, but there are good reasons why FFA wouldn't have been pursued by the Westminster government at the time. First, I think that rUK genuinely wanted to keep the Union going, with as little change as possible. No central government likes losing too much control. Second, FFA is a fairly radical devolution, and arguably untried in its extent. It had obvious upsides for Scotland (perhaps too many) if everything worked out OK, but it was entirely appropriate for the Westminster government to conclude that the downside risks were much greater than the SNP had considered. Unfortunately, the toxicity of the Conservative brand meant that any attempt to enlighten the Scottish electorate would have been marketed adversely, as indeed it was in Project Fear. This difficulty would have dictated caution, since it is not in the interests of rUK to have an economic basket case on its northern border. Third, the Westminster government would not have wished to seem to be a pushover when it came to SNP demands, and it certainly wouldn't want to give the SNP anything to crow about. Fourth, the Westminster government might well have thought that, in the long run, oil economies are cursed by oil, but that doesn't stop them having bursts of good weather. The prospect of Salmond getting lucky and running around Europe as if he had just won a lottery would be asking for too much forbearance. Better to give away as little as possible.<br /><br />However, things change (or rather, they don't change on the SNP side). This morning's news suggest breakdown is looming on the Fiscal Framework, and a war of words is developing on financial support for Aberdeen. From an rUK point-of-view, the SNP's obsession with"'the Tories" disguises the fact that the current Westminster government is the preferred choice of the English electorate by quite a wide margin, like it or not. If we had proportional representation, the Conservatives would still lead the Government, but in coalition with the disaffected Labour votes in UKIP (4 million - far more than voted SNP). The current rUK government's political colour isn't a mistake and it won't go away quickly. Constantly ridiculing it, demonising it, asking it to cough up endless cash for Scottish projects with no end in sight will eventually cause the worm to turn on the rUK side. The next phase may start sooner than we think.<br />David GREENnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-89513589864293146732016-01-28T22:39:36.584-08:002016-01-28T22:39:36.584-08:00Hello Gordon1977, Great words. My thoughts exactly...Hello Gordon1977, Great words. My thoughts exactly. I have worked in engineering for over 20 years and just about everybody blames the Tories or Westminster for the decline in Scottish engineering. Also the wish for Labour to return to it's working class roots has never materialised because the world has moved on, but quite a few people think they will go back to the good old days. Very brave of you to speak up.vicfirth62https://www.blogger.com/profile/16933544274174179931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-90809950144938759822016-01-28T22:29:47.421-08:002016-01-28T22:29:47.421-08:00Hello all, I thought that Kevin Hague did a great ...Hello all, I thought that Kevin Hague did a great job on Radio Scotland the other day. The same can't be said of the Rev Stuart Campbell, (Is he a real Reverend?) He just seemed to struggle. With no facts or figures other than Brian Ashcroft saying so, he really came across wanting. The Reverend's best comment was when he was asked to reply to a factually correct comment from Kevin Hague and all he could say that he tuned out during Kevin's rant. Brilliant stuff from the Reverend!vicfirth62https://www.blogger.com/profile/16933544274174179931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-65921936673526010002016-01-28T22:21:25.069-08:002016-01-28T22:21:25.069-08:00Hello all, I thought that Kevin Hague did a great ...Hello all, I thought that Kevin Hague did a great job on Radio Scotland the other day. The same can't be said of the Rev Stuart Campbell, (Is he a real Reverend?) He just seemed to struggle throughout the interview. His final reply was brilliant. Kevin Hague had given a long factual reply & when John Beattie asked Reverend Campbell for his reply all Reverend Campbell said was that he had blanked out during Kevin Hague's rant. Superb reply Mr. Reverend!vicfirth62https://www.blogger.com/profile/16933544274174179931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-43817249269477469632016-01-28T04:50:36.185-08:002016-01-28T04:50:36.185-08:00@ Anonymous 17:59
Yes, I well remember the disaste...@ Anonymous 17:59<br />Yes, I well remember the disasters of Upper Clyde Shipbuilders and Linwood. Too often Scottish workers have been left jobless by a combination of aggressively uncooperative trade union leaders, poor (and intimidated) management, lack of awareness of the threat of foreign competition, low productivity, poor quality control, late product delivery and complacent indolence on their own part. <br /><br />The decline of Scottish industry is lazily blamed on Thatcher and the hated Westminster (i.e. English), but in reality the rot set in after 1940, with the widespread nationalisation or state control of key industries, which convinced workers they were guaranteed jobs for life and they did not need to adapt, change or modernise. <br /><br />When added to the failure to modernise old working practices, lack of investment in capital tooling and infrastructure, and a desire to maintain large but unproductive workforces the eventual outcome was predictable by the mid-1960s. One can hardly blame the banks (the other popular culprit) for refusing to lend or invest in these economically declining and unviable 'businesses'. <br /><br />Indeed, some economists predicted the extinction of traditional industries in the 1960s. Thatcher certainly should have handled change much better, but the failure of old industries was not hers, but that of Scottish workers and managers, who both preferred to blame 'the English' for deindustrialisation, ignoring the fact that exactly the same decline happened south of the border for identical reasons.<br /><br />The SNP and Scottish Labour both ultimately subscribe to a form of fantasy aspiration and corporatism culture where the state will create and protect jobs regardless of the cost, as a form of dependency welfare. Until ordinary Scots start to wake up and appreciate that the 1940-1975 era is dead and can never be resurrected, they will go on supporting intellectually immature political parties that prefer to spout unrealistic promises and advocate easy solutions (unlimited oil, socialism, independence) as a catch-all panacea for much more profound underlying difficulties. <br /><br />And when their fantasies fail to come true they will blame the English and say they have been defeated by conspiracies. Sadly I fear that it is a Scots national characteristic to have exaggerated expectations of success and then when that is not achieved to blame everyone except themselves.Gordon 1977https://www.blogger.com/profile/05488755921533357270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-4701953830748905622016-01-27T17:59:56.126-08:002016-01-27T17:59:56.126-08:00The point we are not addressing is what SNP sold t...The point we are not addressing is what SNP sold to the people of Scotland, the oil wealth as an assured source of income to stand alone. They claimed we are better off on our own under the guidance of socialists whilst selling the notion of wealth, the nation's oil to support the cause. Apparently, oil would solve all our problems, the revenues sustaining a nation's new path. Now, we all see the potential complete failure of our economy under the SNP who sold us 'the best case scenario' and not the 'reality' which has suddenly descended upon the oil industry, and the great source of Scottish Government revenue has evaporated. The disgraceful performance of the SNP to present a 'Utopia' financed by oil followed by rhetorical lies about the economy will be revealed in time. <br />And what of the people of Scotland who followed the SNP narrative? How do they extract themselves from the creation of a 3rd world nation, compliments of the SNP Nationalists?<br /><br />So, where are we now? The question to ask is how the SNP would manage the economy without the equivalent of the Barnet Formula (which is essentially a subsidy of our governments revenue)?<br /><br />What happened to the collective culture in Scotland where we stood together as people of the whole of the UK, the whole of the UK, I emphasise? The notion that collective rebellion by socialists will offer our nation a future of prosperity, health and 'power of the people' is a delusion which the SNP use in the same way a whore sells untruths with the promise of sincerity. <br /><br />Why do we not have a champion to change the course, to explain the truth? Are Scots afraid to speak and confront the left wing? 70 years ago we supported conservatism. Gradually, the Unions changed our culture from one of workers competing with the world to a people who are unable to attract foreign investment because of our unwillingness to accept the passing of our great industries, steel production, coal mining, oil decline. Our response: strike and blame the english (westminster) instead of recognising or understanding the need to work harder than the rest of the world to succeed. The sadness is that SNP look to Nationalists in Ireland to further their claim for potential success whilst ignoring the failings of socialism throughout the world. SNP, would impoverish all of us by extracting power from Westminster and delivering the exchequer to their hands.<br /><br />Who truly believes we need to exist as a small nation instead of a strong union sustained by the collective power of our combined nations. Scotland, succeeds well within the larger UK order, collectively benefitting from economic growth, and collectively fighting troubled times such as the decline of oil which currently affects 250,000 people throughout the UK. Aberdeenshire, the great source of SNP's wealth may die!<br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-2649141644322317622016-01-27T13:44:18.872-08:002016-01-27T13:44:18.872-08:00Was that "the biggest financial meltdown ever...Was that "the biggest financial meltdown ever"? Then I would say, since we have not seen mass poverty and unemployment like in the 1920s, I think the UK government must have overseen it quite capably.<br />MDAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-37303324496113218452016-01-27T05:01:17.538-08:002016-01-27T05:01:17.538-08:00To those of you posting abuse on this site please ...To those of you posting abuse on this site please note that the supporters of Kev find them pathetic and a sorry reflection of SNP supporters. Remember the truism 'All political careers end in tears' when the the time comes to the SNP leadership very few will regret their exit from the stage. Their legacy when they grow old and reflect will be harshly judgedEd Wynnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09391920191197395980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-21868103943808472282016-01-27T02:53:15.278-08:002016-01-27T02:53:15.278-08:00Dear Kevin -
Please stick at this. I find you to...Dear Kevin -<br /><br />Please stick at this. I find you to be pretty inspirational. Indeed (and without wishing to embarrass you) whoever is running the 'No' campaign next time (and I am pretty sure there will be a 'next' time) should tap you to undertake a formal role - eg, business czar, or something. (I also think, incidentally, they should tap Angus Deaton, Niall Ferguson and JK Rowling (if she'd be up for it), and deciding from the off to run an ultra-positive campaign, which should have been done last time. But that's for the future.)Caius Marriushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06306453082587984507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-37223725413895700302016-01-27T02:43:41.356-08:002016-01-27T02:43:41.356-08:00David GREEN -
Bingo! A big chunk - really, 50%, ...David GREEN -<br /><br />Bingo! A big chunk - really, 50%, give or take - of the Scottish electorate has been utterly blinded by nationalism, and I believe that there is no way to break them out of their psychosis than to give it to them good and hard - which means either FFA or independence. Indeed, I wrote to the PM's office immediately after the General Election saying that he should ram FFA down the SNP's throat and stand back and watch them twist in the wind. If he had done this, the Scottish economy would currently be at the starting gate of the deepest recession ever experienced in this part of the world, and he would have been able to say to the Scottish electorate, 'Well, YOU voted for it!'. But, alas, he did not take up my suggestion, leaving the SNP free to continue their unceasing fomentation of grievance and poisoning of Scottish public discourse.<br /><br />I also wrote to the PM suggesting that he include a referendum on the same day as the Scottish elections this year, asking whether the Scottish people wished Trident to remain at Faslane, and moving it to Milford Haven - which the Welsh Government has said it would gladly host - in the event that it was rejected. Again, my suggestion went unheeded.<br /><br />In short, I am pretty frustrated with the feeble way Mr Cameron has dealt with the SNP - I am pretty sure that Mrs Thatcher or Winston Churchill, for example, would have immediately seen with absolute clarity the maliciousness of these people, and would have socked it to them accordingly.Caius Marriushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06306453082587984507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-27186197942073207852016-01-27T02:06:15.304-08:002016-01-27T02:06:15.304-08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-5842899927885493542016-01-27T00:39:01.919-08:002016-01-27T00:39:01.919-08:00He has no argument, no brains, and I am guessing...He has no argument, no brains, and I am guessing no sex life. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-92193579037656535412016-01-26T23:55:00.775-08:002016-01-26T23:55:00.775-08:00Anon@ 11:47
"You get free rein to present yo...Anon@ 11:47<br /><br />"You get free rein to present your blog of opinion dressed up as 'fact' at the BBC"<br /><br />Go on then - name ONE thing mentioned on the JB programme which Kev said which was not a fact.<br /><br />You can't, because you know it not to be true. Instead, you do what every other Nat does. You attack the person. It's desperate stuff, really. Even Mr Campbell had nothing to counter the facts with except digs at Mr Hague. <br /><br />"it is because you seek to belittle those who disagree with you and claim you don't"<br /><br />You're doing just that right now, only you're too blind/stupid/ignorant to see it. <br /><br />"Your pious moaning is compounded by those around you. Now they are shuddering and clutching their pearls in faux outrage that being called mentally ill is the worst thing ever."<br /><br />See?<br /><br />I was going to ignore your post at first, but I think you deserve a reply at least from someone.<br /><br />You are what's bad about this Country.<br /><br />You lack the ability to debate rationally. You would prefer to attack personally than discuss true facts, because you can't bring yourself to deal with the reality that the facts are.... well, facts. You are in constant denial over the lies you were told by the likes of WoS, the white paper, other nats. Deep down you KNOW you cannot dispute the data offered on this blog. Therefore you attack what's left - the person. No wonder so many of us remain anonymous, if this is the way you feel you're entitled to behave.<br /><br />"You need to take a long hard look at yourself. "<br /><br />This advice was directed at the writer. I would take it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-36258784062588102192016-01-26T23:31:45.622-08:002016-01-26T23:31:45.622-08:00Reluctant though I am to say this, mauling the Sco...Reluctant though I am to say this, mauling the Scottish White Paper on independence is probably producing diminishing returns. After all, the Yes side lost. The aim surely has to be to hold future White Papers, and the SNP to better account when they try the same trick again. <br /><br />This morning, we have Swinney bleating that he won't sign off on the Scotland Bill without the adjustment to the Barnett formula that he wants. It is an open secret that he wants per-capita indexed deduction, a modification that removes the risk of slower population growth in Scotland reducing the block grant over time. Implicit in Swinney's moaning is his view that the Barnett money is the sum needed to give "the Scottish government the capability to create a fair and prosperous Scotland, and the ability to use the powers we have in an effective way." So we now have the SNP getting close to telling us the sum needed from rUK to keep Scotland in the pampered state it has become used to; about £8 billion a year. So the task for those interested in maintaing the Union is to agree with Stuart Campbell that oil is too unpredictable in price for anyone but an idiot to bank on, and for the SNP to develop an honest White Paper that addresses the £8 billion shortfall caused by withdrawal of Barnett money upon independence. If it was honest, the White Paper wouldn't look pretty, as Alex Bell has already pointed out. But we are told, in the South, that Swinney would rather live in a cave and be independent that to build a shared polity within the UK.<br /><br />For rUK, Barnett amounts to a welfare payment of about £1500 for every man, woman and child in Scotland. Given the ratio of populations, that means every man, woman and child in rUK is divvying up about £150 each a year, or about £600 for each nuclear family of four. If withheld and targeted at lower income rUK families, it could produce benefits of >£1000 per rUK family per year. An obvious way of addressing austerity. The puzzle increasingly is why rUK doesn't want these benefits. The answer has to be that it suits both Labour and Conservatives not to want them. It suits Labour because it is Danegeld that it hopes will buy back Scottish Labour votes in the longer term. I personally think this is a pathetic and unlikely prospect, but without those Scottish MPs, Labour is doomed to opposition for a long time. rUK also suspects that were Labour interested in buying the votes in, courtesy of an alliance with the SNP, the cost would go up and up. For the Conservatives, it is probably 70% Trident and the inconvenience of moving it, 20% loss of status for Great Britain, and 10% sentimental attachment to the Union. The rUK electorate may yet tire of both policies and decide the Scots are not worth the candle. Sticking it to the Scots might yet become an English political sport!David GREENnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-2520381096612705522016-01-26T15:28:20.675-08:002016-01-26T15:28:20.675-08:00I'm sorry if you are mentally ill and you find...I'm sorry if you are mentally ill and you find it offensive to be called that as an insult. I'm sorry if you believe you are not mentally unwell and believe it to be an insult.<br /><br />I'm sorry you have no insight into your own behaviour and how you treat people on the internet who think differently.<br /><br />I'm sorry for you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-41415912840654840582016-01-26T15:19:24.425-08:002016-01-26T15:19:24.425-08:00In the UK we cannot understand the appeal of "...In the UK we cannot understand the appeal of "noddy" Sturgeon for the Scots. The SNP do not seem to have any policies apart from free university and getting rid of 8000 Trident jobs.<br />All of us were hoping for a yes vote, that would have been marvellous seeing Sturgeon and Mr Smug explain away the collapse in the oil price and deal with being a Euro currency nation.<br />But, damn it , you voted No.<br />Next time you should insist that the whole of the UK get a vote in the referendum, I guarantee a yes vote.Arbo regularhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07028613595289039402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-29330516937522566722016-01-26T14:18:27.900-08:002016-01-26T14:18:27.900-08:00As has been pointed out many times before, it does...As has been pointed out many times before, it doesn't matter who else got anything wrong. It was the SNP who were betting the future of an entire nation on the revenues expected from oil. So it was criminally irresponsible of them not to model at least one worst-case price/revenue scenario that was not irresponsibly optimistic. As it was, the forecasts they chose were High, Higher and Lottoland, and on a continuous upward trend at that. The actual downward trend in oil prices was apparent well before the referendum, as the ever less optimistic OBR forecasts reflected at the time, but the SNP never hinted to the electorate that anything less than their confident predictions was possible, let alone increasingly likely. Just disgraceful con artists. RocohamAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-16015673520881332892016-01-26T14:11:25.458-08:002016-01-26T14:11:25.458-08:00The Taxpayers Alliance puts the real UK debt at ap...The Taxpayers Alliance puts the real UK debt at approximately £9 trillion.<br />The UK government oversaw the biggest financial meltdown ever.<br />The next meltdown is just around the corner.<br />The " broad shoulders " of the UK will compensate for any damage done by low oil prices, according to the pre referendum utterances of the NO campaign.<br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-70942145746263761822016-01-26T14:06:14.461-08:002016-01-26T14:06:14.461-08:00Pluck out the beam, old thing. The disgusting infl...Pluck out the beam, old thing. The disgusting inflammatory rantings of WoS and his acolytes have long ago plumbed depths that Kevin has (and I hope never will) ever manage to reach. In fact, given the sheer knob-headedness of most of his critics, I reckon he has maintained an admirable level of civility throughout. Rocoham.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-91065423368776826242016-01-26T13:22:14.988-08:002016-01-26T13:22:14.988-08:00The fact Wings resorts to ridiculous personal slig...The fact Wings resorts to ridiculous personal slights pretty much tells you all you need to know. He has no argument whatsoever and he knows it. What a joke he is, pathetic. <br /><br />Garethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07041569474661396495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-61091959266088294232016-01-26T12:22:33.968-08:002016-01-26T12:22:33.968-08:00If as in the white paper these predicted revenues ...If as in the white paper these predicted revenues were to form 15% of the budget of an independent Scotland, they had better be right, or not be included at all. To get it so wrong should not pass without comment; whether it be down to incompetence or an attempt to deliberately mislead (and going by the £5bn difference from OBR figures it sounds like the latter). Johnny Macnoreply@blogger.com