tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post2007512325857548563..comments2024-01-12T01:56:21.933-08:00Comments on chokka blog: Crazy HorsesKevin Haguehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14587343060415859159noreply@blogger.comBlogger48125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-6228991047014061802017-09-07T01:52:17.775-07:002017-09-07T01:52:17.775-07:00image was just from a google image searchimage was just from a google image searchKevin Haguehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14587343060415859159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-27860857403627973592017-09-05T09:33:54.182-07:002017-09-05T09:33:54.182-07:00Would you mind forwarding me the source info for t...Would you mind forwarding me the source info for the photo at the top of this blog? I am working on a Troika image project and would like to obtain rights for use.bongo donhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18030771924879528140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-77570356084873152182016-11-02T05:21:47.238-07:002016-11-02T05:21:47.238-07:00Anonymous - its only valid to deny the accuracy of...Anonymous - its only valid to deny the accuracy of GERS if you have a detailed reason based on verifiable facts. Ed Wynnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09391920191197395980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-33461716416573747622016-11-02T02:25:21.909-07:002016-11-02T02:25:21.909-07:00That's a fair point, however, while previous f...That's a fair point, however, while previous funding models may not have been needs based as such, Scotland for the first 250 years in the Union certainly was desperately in need.<br /><br />Poverty, disease, low wages, poor housing conditions and unemployment meant for most of the 19th century and early 20th century Scotland lost between 10-40% of the natural population increase to emigration every decade.<br /><br />The gap between Scotland and England then in terms of personal wealth was far greater than it is now. <br /><br />Even as late as 1911, two-thirds of Scots were living in one- or two-roomed houses compared with only 7% in England. Poverty was widespread, wages were low in comparison with other parts of the UK and infant mortality rates were alarmingly high.<br /><br />The creation of the welfare state and NHS helped improve life and the collapse of the British Empire and process of decolonisation meant there were fewer job opportunities abroad for Scots and many returned or fewer left to go abroad in the first place. <br /><br />This meant our population began to stabalise and it was only in the 1990s that the numbers of people moving to Scotland began to outpace the numbers of people leaving.<br /><br />And the wealth gap between Scotland and most of the UK (London & South East aside) has more or less been reduced to on par.<br /><br />Leaving aside our poor fiscal performance which is largely as a result of over spending in Scotland, despite the oil price crash our overall economic performance isn't too bad at present. <br /><br />Because so much of the oil industry is so localised to Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire, we shouldn't see the type of impact on our cities, regions and towns as a whole as the collapse of mining, shipbuilding and heavy industry. <br /><br />Currently our unemployment rate fluctuates slightly below or above the UK average and our GDP per capita is more or less the same as the UK. Even without North Sea oil and gas, tax revenue in Scotland is still only just slightly less than the UK per person. <br /><br />According to our gross value added per capita, apart from London, the South East and the East of England, we are one of the wealthier parts of the UK.<br /><br />So there are no real reasons why we deserve special treatment over the poorer regions of England & Wales. Clearly what would be in the best interests of the UK as a whole would be a needs based system.<br /><br />On top of that devolution, 'one of the most powerful devolved parliaments in the world' apparently, means we now have tax raising powers to increase our revenue if we want to. If devolution to the cities and regions of England continues, those areas are quite rightly going to be asking for a more appropriate and fair funding system than Barnett.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Drewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-92075184245681002602016-11-01T17:44:15.411-07:002016-11-01T17:44:15.411-07:00Want to point us to exactly which bit of GERS'...Want to point us to exactly which bit of GERS' accuracy you "dispute"? By which I don't mean the usual "it doesn't tell us about what an independent Scotland would do" (which is not its purpose) but one demonstrably inaccurate figure within GERS' current data, given its methodology. I suspect the Scottish civil servants responsible for the GERS figures would be grateful for your input as well. rocohamAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-51616721191573192942016-11-01T03:33:50.965-07:002016-11-01T03:33:50.965-07:00The Barnett Formula wasn't created until the 1...The Barnett Formula wasn't created until the 1970s, but it was merely a continuation of the same funding levels that Scotland had been receiving for decades.<br /><br />The Goschen Proportions resulted in Scottish spending reaching 112% of the UK average by the late 20s. In the 50s, when Goschen was suspended, Scotland was receiving more than 120% of UK average spending, and that level was maintained until Barnett was put in place. <br /><br />From a Scottish Parliament briefing paper:<br /><br /><i>In the thirty year period thereafter, Scottish spending varied between 97 (in 1890) and 101 (in 1920). The rapid growth in the Scottish expenditure relative to the UK (hereinafter called the ‘expenditure relative’) began in 1928, when it was reported at 112, and by 1953 had reached 119 (McCrone 1999). This trend continued upwards during the period between formulae (1959-79)<br /><br /><br />Scotland’s expenditure relative increased to 126 in 1969-70 before falling to 117 in 1974-5, then falling again to 122 by 1977-8, and fluctuating around that level throughout the eighties (Midwinter 2000).</i><br /><br />http://archive.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/finance/papers-07/fip07-01.pdf<br /><br />The future of Barnett certainly isn't guaranteed, but Scotland has been receiving a similar level of funding for almost 90 years, and I can't see any major changes being implemented soon. User512https://www.blogger.com/profile/10568930730248085722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-17574601728857428412016-11-01T02:27:28.141-07:002016-11-01T02:27:28.141-07:00Thanks Ed
The exact wording about Barnett in the ...Thanks Ed<br /><br />The exact wording about Barnett in the Smith Commission small print says 'the two governments have agreed that these arrangements will be reviewed following the UK and Scottish Parliament elections in 2020 and 2021 respectively'<br /><br />There will be an independent report put before both governments.<br /><br />So it isn't exactly clear how things will play out around the election periods.<br /><br />But Barnett was never meant as a proper and fair funding mechanism, it has always been political. Regions of England and Wales have been suffering economic decline for years, far greater than Scotland, but Barnett takes no account of that. <br /><br />Just like the Goschen formula in the 1880s was designed to give Ireland an over generous funding settlement to try and address Irish Nationalism. <br /><br />It is no coincidence the Barnett was created in the 1970s when the first North Sea oil boom gave Scottish Nationalism a huge boost. Giving Scotland an over generous funding settlement was a blow to Scottish Nationalists and helped ease anxieties of Scottish Unionists. It worked too, as the first campaign for a Scottish Assembley failed in 1979.<br /><br />However, now the immediate threat of independence is over following the No vote, the UK Government doesn't need to grant another referendum ever again, or at least for a few decades. The oil revenues have dried up and so the political need for Barnett has gone.<br /><br />I suspect the SNP will narrowly cling onto power in 2021, no matter how small and unpopular their minority government is by then. When Barnett is then scrapped in favour of a fairer settlement for England and Wales, Scotland will face billions of pounds in cuts to services or have to raise taxes dramatically. <br /><br />The Conservatives are probably calculating that a fairer funding settlement than Barnett will play very well with their core voters and swing voters in England and Wales. The SNP will be forced to abandon universal benefits that made them popular with the middle classes in Scotland and that or big tax hikes will kill them off as a political force. <br /><br />It won't be much fun for Scottish Unionists either because Barnett is one of their main arguments against independence. But for the Conservatives a bit of pain for Scotland is a price worth paying. <br /><br /><br /><br />Drewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-3420751934192923952016-10-31T13:50:22.297-07:002016-10-31T13:50:22.297-07:00For Barnett the Treasury issues a "statement ...For Barnett the Treasury issues a "statement of funding policy" document, all the info you will probably require.<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14302223513765647638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-61507293735819238602016-10-31T09:47:57.629-07:002016-10-31T09:47:57.629-07:00Sadly too many people are ready to believe that &q...Sadly too many people are ready to believe that "the prospect of having their own costs increased" is baseless propaganda by the other side. See the easy dismissals of analysis as "Project Fear", which the case both of iScot and Brexit has in the event been proved correct every time. rocohamAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-28557524206508416622016-10-31T08:08:56.516-07:002016-10-31T08:08:56.516-07:00Drew that's an interesting post. I was not awa...Drew that's an interesting post. I was not aware that Barnett was only guaranteed until 2020. The timing of this in the Westminster and Scottish election cycles would be interesting. Even with the uncertainty of a Brexit overlay re establishing Barnett in a new settlement would have to come to the table in ?2019?. A source of gigantic grievance creation and would enable SNP to pass blame for subsequent cuts onto their bogey 'Westmonster' to get through SGE2021.<br /><br />The Tories would have a solid argument to say the funding is being corrected to UK (English) norms and if SNP want to have a high tax high spend economy then they can do so. If at GE2020 the Tories have a Brexit deal and are are confident of a comfortable victory then they could well change Barnett in the teeth of the SNP outrage.<br /><br />Of course if Trump wins next week none of this will be relevant because we will all be a cloud of radioactive dust or run by the Russians. LOLEd Wynnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09391920191197395980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-11971524302374032962016-10-31T06:35:15.415-07:002016-10-31T06:35:15.415-07:00There's not a no risk option available to Scot...There's not a no risk option available to Scotland in terms of our current deficit and fiscal position. There are many uncertainties with staying in the UK which might not on the face of it be as risky as independence but they are not without economic costs.<br /><br />Barnett is only gauranteed until 2020. The architects of the Vow no longer have any political influence in the UK. Scottish Unionists have a little over 3 years to convince the current UK Government that there is a sound case for Scotland enjoying much higher public spending than England and Wales.<br /><br />If Brexit has a negative effect on the UK's economic and fiscal position then it will be difficult for the UK Government to argue in favour of Scotland still getting preferential treatment over England and Wales, particularly now that we have more tax raising powers and with a General election looming in 2020.<br /><br />Barnett gives Scotland an additional 20% on average more in terms of public spending than England. Worst case scenario is that the Conservatives scrap Barnett and come up with a new funding arrangement where Scotland's public spending is brought into line with England. <br /><br />This could see between £1.5 and £2 billion pounds cut from our current budget. This could force the SNP to scrap free prescriptions (£900 million) tuition fees (£225 million) and free personal care for the elderly (£350 million).<br /><br />The alternative would be to raise taxes. ADP, Aggregates Levy and Stamp duty wouldn't really provide much additional income to fill that shortfall.<br /><br />That leaves us with income tax. A 1p raise in income tax brings in about £500 million so we would have to raise income tax by 3-4p to fill the gap. <br /><br />So while Nationalists currently don't have to face up to their own economic arguments being tested, it's time for a bit more honesty about the reality facing Unionists, who most likely will have to face up to the challenges we face. <br /><br /> Drewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-53621804549277692992016-10-31T04:34:10.360-07:002016-10-31T04:34:10.360-07:00Hi Edward Witney Is your analysis available? coul...Hi Edward Witney Is your analysis available? could you post a link? I would like to read it Thanks EdwardEd Wynnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09391920191197395980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-11817295975551499542016-10-31T01:23:20.889-07:002016-10-31T01:23:20.889-07:00Hi Kailyard The difference between you and Kevin ...Hi Kailyard The difference between you and Kevin is that the latter at least bases his analysis on published data and statements. You do however make one point which is worth commenting. The start point of an iScot would have to be the fiscal flows which are known about and the institutions of government as they are now. Your point out that no one has knowledge of the post independence situation regarding flows. However it is possible to model this in detail. The current fiscal situation is known to some extent: - for example ScotGov expenditure and revenues are published. A spread of assumptions can be made about certain liabilities e.g state pensions share of debt. The set up costs of various institutions can be estimated e.g iScot DVLA, HMRC, Foreign embassies etc. <br /><br />Assumptions can be made running forward regarding economic performance and revenues. Tax and expenditure rates can be modeled.<br /><br />I remember watching Alec Salmond comment that iScot would require a couple of suitable naval vessels to protect Scotland and its Fisheries. Sitting next to me was someone involved in Naval Shipbuilding. His comment was there is a couple of £Bn and a few hundred million a year running costs.<br /><br />My point is this - I think it is worth doing a really comprehensive economic model of iScot with all the costs of set up and future government expenditure. On that you are right.<br /><br />The debate in Scotland is ruined currently by emotion and failure to review data and the consequential information coolly. I would be happy to review your argued fiscal plan for iScot when youn have it ready Ed Wynnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09391920191197395980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-4699137833153378272016-10-30T15:41:04.874-07:002016-10-30T15:41:04.874-07:00Hi Kailyard
You seem to disregard the power of ma...Hi Kailyard<br /><br />You seem to disregard the power of mathematics. We don't know what the fiscal situation would be at the beginning of independence because it hasn't happened but we do know where we are now and we know the deficit. From that it's easy to calculate the likely deficits/surpluses from any growth and spend scenario. I've already done it so we can predict with great accuracy where we would be. <br /><br />You seem to think that Scotland under independence would find some hidden treasure that would solve all our problems. There's a good reason why the SNP has never ever ever issued financial figures for an independent Scotland. They know they're awful and so do we. <br /><br />Even if we could go independent with little negative consequences there's a time bomb waiting under the SNP. Any currency situation other than Sterling is likely to lead to colossal financial losses for Scotland and its people. That's why the SNP are so desperate to find the least bad option because they're all horrific. <br /><br />I suggest you do some calculations on the future numbers of a potential independent Scotland instead of gazing at the flag and dreaming of Mel Gibson.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13644182561334208262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-81273033632740828042016-10-30T15:31:32.609-07:002016-10-30T15:31:32.609-07:00Oh Kailyard
that you can be this deep in the deba...Oh Kailyard<br /><br />that you can be this deep in the debate and resort to "where we start from is irrelevant to where we might go" ...<br /><br />You are firmly in the school of "we know nothing" - you resort to the approach that says our current economic activity is irrelevant, we should (apparently) assume independence will transform us into a high tax-generating economy because [except there is never any explanation of how or why or to what extent that could feasibly be true and over what timeframe this magical transformation might happen].<br /><br />You eschew any discussion of our public spending (the healthcare, education, pensions, roads, policing etc. we're currently used to receiving) because to ask how we might sustain that (or if not what we might cut) is apparently futile because "none of us has any experience of an independent Scotland".<br /><br />This is not just post-fact, it's post-any-attempt-at-logical-reasonKevin Haguehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14587343060415859159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-13189775624824865202016-10-30T05:46:28.198-07:002016-10-30T05:46:28.198-07:00Kevin @ 28/oct.6.15pm
"...no disagreement wi...Kevin @ 28/oct.6.15pm<br /><br />"...no disagreement with any of the substantive points ...made..."<br /><br />Sorry for the tardy response but I've been "gone fishing"<br /><br />I thought your "troika" intro was an invite for some levity.However..<br />How can I reply to there being anything substantive in your graphs etc. in regard to an Independent Scotland when it (your creative writing) is all a priori. You are talking only about a Scotland that is embedded in UK of GB and NI from the present.<br />You,nor anyone else, has any direct experience of an Independent Scotland and any inter/intra dynamics regarding that construct and it's relations with any other future phenomena.<br />You would be as well writing about the fiscal situation in Shangri-la or disclose a monetary inventory of the palatial furniture of Camelot. The worth of the smoky mirrors in the great hall perhaps.<br />No, I can see all of it as nothing other than SNPBAD and a denigration of self determination.<br />I'm off into the Kailyard for a fish BBQ. It's sunday and the Rules are fairly relaxed. kailyard ruleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05729972072880403259noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-78912963185158458822016-10-30T03:33:46.839-07:002016-10-30T03:33:46.839-07:00I’m always cautious about economic predictions and...I’m always cautious about economic predictions and doubly so during a period where we are undergoing the most revolutionary changes that have happened in my lifetime and where the government’s policies are largely unknown.<br /><br />The Fraser of Allander report on Brexit was very interesting. It showed that Brexit will hit England much harder than Scotland. In terms of deficit though it’s important to remember that the biggest tax payer (financial services) is not the biggest industry in terms of GDP.<br /><br />I could very easily see a hard Brexit disrupting the tax payments made by the City. Or looking at a single case in the car industry Nissan have been offered a subsidy roughly equal to 1p on income tax to cover their Brexit costs.<br /><br />So it’s entirely possible that a Scotland’s deficit may end up better than the UK’s as a whole due to the English efforts to raise their deficit to our level.Andrew Veitchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-70158696235726919372016-10-29T13:24:33.872-07:002016-10-29T13:24:33.872-07:00Kevin, another excellent piece which I shall re-re...Kevin, another excellent piece which I shall re-read in more depth when I have more time. In the meantime I have been meaning to ask but am not on Twitter/etc - could you please write a piece explaining exactly what the Barnett Formula is? It seems to me that there is plenty of opportunity for wilful misreading of this item by those who might do such things. Thanks in advanceAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-88538447486809557582016-10-29T01:08:33.680-07:002016-10-29T01:08:33.680-07:00This was one of the more sobering blogs I have rea...This was one of the more sobering blogs I have read in some time. The shear awfulness of the SNP is sometimes difficult to believe but, there it is in black and white.<br /><br />My benchmark for judging the SNP is always New Zealand, a country that I know well and lived in for many years. It has a similar population size to Scotland, although some important differences. It shows that small independent countries can exist, although not at the same level of prosperity as Scotland.<br /><br />There are three points that strike me about Scottish government as practised by the SNP. First, and strikingly obvious, is the cult of the Dear Leader. The newspapers acquiesce in this with a range of stock Sturgeon photographs: Sturgeon pensive, Sturgeon aggressive, Sturgeon with international leaders, Sturgeon with children, etc. All carefully cultivated. Second, is the utter mediocrity of the SNP government and its administration, bordering in a number of areas on the incompetent. And the third, which is related to the other two, is the near invisibility of the Scottish Cabinet.<br /><br />Now, don't get me wrong. New Zealand has had its strong Prime Ministers, but even Sir Robert Muldoon in his prime, had to deal with a cabinet, and many of these people were extraordinarily gifted. A fair amount of legislation that was introduced in New Zealand over the past forty years has gone on to become international best practice, including Reserve Bank independence, transparent accounting of Government finances, Civil Service reform, etc. <br /><br />But, it comes at a price. New Zealand has just been ranked by the World Bank as second in the world as the country most easy to do business in, the same place as last year, and immediately behind Singapore. And if that isn't a clue, then it should be. Because if you're a Scot and don't much like the idea of Singaporean openness, then the chances are you won't much care for New Zealand. In New Zealand, you pay substantial fees to go to university. You pay to go to the doctor and the dentist. It is known as 'User Pays'. It doesn't apply to everything (surgery, for example), but it is an important mindset. Looking at Scotland under the SNP with a NZ lens, and one immediately wants to know why Scots are not paying for doctor's visits, or why tertiary education is free. This sort of thing is unaffordable, and grossly distorting economically. No wonder the NHS in Scotland, a wholly devolved responsibility, is such a mess when the SNP, like the Welsh Assembly, try and run it on less expenditure per capita than England. The difference and the Barnett top-up for health is spent instead on giving free university education to European students. This is not 'Stronger for Scotland', as the SNP would have us believe, but simple economic stupidity. Having a muppet like Robison as the Health Minister merely compounds the problem. I might add parenthetically that an independent Scotland will be quite unable to afford Universities with the world rankings that Edinburgh, Glasgow, etc. currently have. The highest New Zealand university is ranked only in the top 200.<br /><br />New Zealand did have its apocalyptic moment when the Muldoon Government fought the markets in 1984 and lost, ushering in the new economics. I was there, and the similarity between wholly insupportable economic policies then, and the SNP's policies now is very striking.<br /><br />I sense that Sturgeon and the SNP Government are approaching an economically cathartic end-game, in which the ridiculous freebies have to be abandoned to stop the Scottish NHS, for example, from imploding. But it will be a shock when it comes, and the SNP will probably be in ruins for some time. Independence will merely make things far worse. The SNP know this which is why they lie so much.David GREENnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-52386136122575706812016-10-28T06:15:35.266-07:002016-10-28T06:15:35.266-07:00Kailyard - so no disagreement with any of the subs...Kailyard - so no disagreement with any of the substantive points I've made then? good oh.Kevin Haguehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14587343060415859159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-5547236928117050902016-10-28T05:27:09.639-07:002016-10-28T05:27:09.639-07:00Whoa. Hold your equine quips there Kevin. The old ...Whoa. Hold your equine quips there Kevin. The old barn door is wide open and you are clearly seen flogging that dead horse SNPBAD yet again. But...<br /><br />Just crane your mane to the south and you can see the Four Unionist Rustlers of the Ajockalypse stampeding about.<br /><br />There's the Heedless Horsewoman astride a nag swinging her blunt but deadly scythe in mindless Mayhem. To her left atop a Trotting mule, with saddlebags stuffed with backstabbers, rides Tilting Corbyn Quixote.To her right, sitting backwards and wearing boxing gloves,Squire Ukip canters drunkenly aboard a gelded donkey. Taking up the rear, and almost lost to sight, come the FibDems at a gallop on a Shetland pony.<br /><br />Now crane your mane to the north and see an unchained unicorn,clear eyed and resolute, pointing a sharp horn at the belly of this Distorted Dobbin on the make and move.<br /><br />The Scotland you and your schadenfreudian acolytes write and speak of is mythic.<br /><br />Hi--Yo Clydesdale and awa-a-a-y. <br /><br /> nkailyard ruleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05729972072880403259noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-90779008226789150002016-10-28T05:01:39.751-07:002016-10-28T05:01:39.751-07:00What about people hurting in other parts of the UK...What about people hurting in other parts of the UK? <br /><br />Barnett is particularly unfair to Wales while England have had to watch deep cuts to public services, as Scotland remains relatively unscathed in comparison.<br /><br />Every extra billion that goes towards Scotland means less money spent in parts of the country. Scotland is one of the wealthier regions of the UK, there are parts of the North of England and Wales in a worse position than us. <br /><br />And our growing deficit means more borrowing, more money spent servicing the debt and less to spend on public services in the UK as a whole.<br /><br />That surely isn't a price worth paying just to make sure the Vow is delivered.<br /><br />If the UK was making a surplus every year then perhaps it could afford to carry Scotland but the fact is unless we get our own house in order, people in England and Wales are suffering by losing local services.<br /><br /><br />Drewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-43204251836229008732016-10-28T04:37:41.134-07:002016-10-28T04:37:41.134-07:00No, it can't be guaranteed - nothing in life c...No, it can't be guaranteed - nothing in life can - but it's there and was maintained as the vow said it would be.<br /><br />The irony that it would be in the separatists' interests to hurt Scots by seeing it scrapped is surely not lost on anybody Kevin Haguehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14587343060415859159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-28257596025469412392016-10-28T03:53:42.226-07:002016-10-28T03:53:42.226-07:00'The problem he faces is that one of the few c...'The problem he faces is that one of the few certainties of independence is that Scotland would lose what is currently a £9bn annual fiscal transfer from the rest of the UK.'<br /><br />Can anyone offer an absolute guarantee the Barnett formula, which applies to the majority of the Scottish Parliament's budget, is permanent if we stay in the UK? <br /><br />In the aftermath of the independence referendum the Barnett forumla got a stay of execution until 2020 as part of the Vow/Smith Commission.<br /><br />But Scottish Unionists are relying on future Conservative governments (assuming Labour don't provide an upset in 2020) extending Barnett's lifetime, despite widespread criticism from many MPs, parts of the media and some new Cabinet members.<br /><br />In the same way Nationalists based their economic case on the price of oil, Unionists should be wary they don't fall into the same trap with Barnett. <br /><br /><br />Drewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1603438996450817644.post-32898856223671338502016-10-28T03:52:34.041-07:002016-10-28T03:52:34.041-07:00Another great piece of analysis. Thank you, Kevin....Another great piece of analysis. Thank you, Kevin.<br /><br />Given their pledged "unconditional support" for indyref2, we should keep an eye on the other nationalist party (the Scottish Greens). As you will remember, during the 2014 indyref they advocated an independent currency. Here's what they had to say on the issue of currency in their "vision" document (no longer available on their website, I note):<br /><br />"We recognise the SNP’s desire to negotiate for continued use of Sterling in a common currency arrangement with the rest of the UK. <br /><br />While those arguing for a No vote will naturally express scepticism, we see no reason why a UK Government would not, in the full light of day after a Yes vote, be willing to make such arrangements. <br /><br />This might even be in Scotland’s interests… in the short term.<br /><br />However we remain clearly of the view that Scotland will only be able to exercise full economic independence if we stand ready to develop our own currency. <br /><br />The SNP Government may find itself playing a weak hand in negotiating the terms of a common currency arrangement if there is no plan B in readiness, and we therefore call on the Scottish Government, at the very least, to begin exploratory work to determine the steps which would be necessary for the development of a Scottish currency, in order that Scotland truly has the freedom to do so if and when it becomes an accepted necessity."<br /><br />So. 175 words. 5 sentences. Most of which are spent explaining why they disagree with the SNP's currency policy.<br /><br />They were happy to advocate a policy that would result in seismic economic upheaval on the basis of a few sentences. No analysis of how we would travel from A to B and the impact on ordinary individuals and the wider economy.<br /><br />Populists always recoil from the bothersome detail of implementation, as we have learned to our peril in the EUref. Let's not let them get away with it again should we find ourselves facing indyref2.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com