Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

And in other news, reality seems to be setting in on the economy, with a number of reports noting just how stuffed Scotland would be with current oil prices....

the SNP government continues to say, as John Swinney did only a few days ago, that “oil is a bonus, and not the basis of Scotland’s economy”.

This is simply untrue, and especially not true of Scotland’s public finances.

The Scottish Government’s own numbers show us that in 2012-13, Scottish total onshore revenues were £47.6 billion while total government spending was £65.2bn, a shortfall of £17.6bn.

As you can see even in 12/13 oil was not the cherry on the cake it was the flour in the cake mix.

http://keithsteeleblog.com/2015/01/01/oil-is-not-a-bonus-never-was-never-will-be/

Oil revenue is not a bonus, it is not the cherry on the cake, it is a huge component of Scottish revenue, receipts of historically unusual proportions were required to plug the gaping black hole in the Scottish finances, and without record high prices the entire independance project simply doesn't stack up.

As an article in the Scotsman recently put it....

To try and shift that balance to the point that oil revenues would be a bonus would inflict so much austerity misery that there would be rioting in the streets. Even middle-class people like me might be among the rioters, storming the Holyrood barricades’.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/peter-jones-snp-s-slip-ups-on-oil-are-revealing-1-3646424

In 2008/9 oil revenue was around £12bn.

In 2012/13 it was around £5bn.

This year it is likely to be as little as £1.5bn.

That would leave Scotland with an annual deficit in the region of 12% to 15% of GDP, or around 25% of current government spending, which is completely impossible to cover without truly extraordinary cuts to services and benefits.

History is already showing just how close Scotland came to disaster.

Time for the nationalists to show a bit more humility.....

.string.

Some of the many issues related to "Total Fiscal Auronomy" are related to Scotland's contribution to the shared cost of being in the Union. Take for example the following:

1 How does Scotland contribute to the "Insurance" that is provided for the currency and for the money which would be needed, for example, to bail out a Bank or support the Pound in times of National emergency.

2 What happens if (when) Scotland does not achieve a balanced budget and additional debt - who bails them out?

3 How will Scotland fare when the English decide to support English goods and not UK goods in order to benefit the English economy and not the Scottish economy?

4 Why should the English support North Sea Oil exploration when there is no benefit to England as a result? ... or anything else for that matter?

5 How will Scotland contribute to its share of bringing down the National debt?

.string.

I had a nervous moment just then, when I read Shakey's comment:

"Anyway, the SNP, .... are fairly good at running countries." because I thought I agreed with her.

But then I realised it was "running" and not "ruining".

I've recovered now.

.string.

Concerning my last-but-one post on Scottish contribution to the UK's overall responsibilities; this Document is relevant.

In that document see Para 2.1.1 of Section 2.1 (Summary)

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

And in other news, reality seems to be setting in on the economy, with a number of reports noting just how stuffed Scotland would be with current oil prices....


http://keithsteeleblog.com/2015/01/01/oil-is-not-a-bonus-never-was-never-will-be/

Oil revenue is not a bonus, it is not the cherry on the cake, it is a huge component of Scottish revenue, receipts of historically unusual proportions were required to plug the gaping black hole in the Scottish finances, and without record high prices the entire independance project simply doesn't stack up.

As an article in the Scotsman recently put it....


http://www.scotsman.com/news/peter-jones-snp-s-slip-ups-on-oil-are-revealing-1-3646424

In 2008/9 oil revenue was around £12bn.

In 2012/13 it was around £5bn.

This year it is likely to be as little as £1.5bn.

That would leave Scotland with an annual deficit in the region of 12% to 15% of GDP, or around 25% of current government spending, which is completely impossible to cover without truly extraordinary cuts to services and benefits.

History is already showing just how close Scotland came to disaster.

Time for the nationalists to show a bit more humility.....

Just as I wouldn't dream these days of posting up articles from Wings over Scotland as 'proof' of anything lest it be shot down for blatant bias and slant... I'll treat your post with the same respect you would have shown anything I posted from there.

And anyway, you're still arguing on the economics of independence, volatile oil prices.. and I cannot really believe that even you think oil prices will stay at the same levels the same forever. Do you ?

...but that impact is relatively small and essentially amounts to returning to normal times rather than being in the rare and exceptional boom-times of $100+ oil.

You've said you aren't really worried about it elsewhere. A quick scan of that topic and you could almost say you were remarkably 'upbeat' about things ? The UK won't be affected much, nor will Aberdeen. But a hypothetical independent Scotland in 2016, can be predicted with 100% certainty by you and others to be a complete basketcase... but neither Aberdeen nor the UK will feel any effects ?

Now I understand in the above that you mean with UK in charge of oil revenues. But, hey, oil prices are oil prices whoever is taking the revenues. I'm glad on the whole to see you so optimistic for the future re oil and it's impacts. And regard $100+ per barrel as boom times rather than the norm.

I agree this is going to last a while.

But worth pointing out $60 - $80 oil is not particularly cheap.

Brent Oil has only been above $80 for 4 years of the last 30, even in inflation adjusted terms, and traded between $30 and $70 from 2000-2007.... Neither Aberdeen nor the UK oil industry collapsed during that time. In fact both prospered....

Yes, it will have an impact on Aberdeen and the UK oil industry, but that impact is relatively small and essentially amounts to returning to normal times rather than being in the rare and exceptional boom-times of $100+ oil.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=67256869&postcount=18

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

If London did capitulate to the SNP and grant full fiscal independence it would be interesting to see the reaction, given the figures above.

Would Scots realise they had been lied to all along or would the feeling be that because the tax revenue is being cycled through Westminster that the English are skimming some off? My fear is that the only way to defeat the SNP and their fantasists once and for all is to show Scots the full horror of what the SNP wish to inflict on them.

Scottish GDP is £132,000,000,000 according to the Scottish Government so revenues have fallen by 8% of GDP. As Scottish Government revenues were about the same as the UK's overall last year, Scotland's Government deficit would have risen this year to about 13% of GDP, far higher than the UK's was at the height of the GFC.

No, I think you should turn it on it's head and see that while Scotland is part of the UK, Scotland has very little chance of ever transitioning away from reliance on oil prices. The degree of that 'reliance' is what's in dispute. Being able to focus on other economic areas in order to build those up.. is one of the actual points of FFA and independence.

Things staying as they are re the status quo economically, means Scotland will never be able transition and build up growth in other important areas as it would like... And it would like.

The value of Scottish international exports rose to a record high of £27.9 billion in 2013, according to latest official figures.
Exports rose by 7.2 per cent on the previous year or £1.9 billion, according to figures presented in the Scottish Government's Global Connections Survey.
The 2013 survey findings show more than 60 per cent of the total - £16.8 billion in value – was attributed to manufacturing firms, and oil and gas figures are not included in the statistics.
Food and drink led the way, accounting for 18 per cent of total exports in 2013, worth around £5 billion.
Around 33 per cent of the 2013 exports total - £9.2 billion – is attributed to the service sector, followed by refined petroleum, which equates to 12.6 per cent of exports, worth £3.5 billion.
The US remains the largest market for Scottish international exports with an estimated £3.9 billion of goods, followed by the Netherlands at £2 billion, Germany at £1.9 billion and France at £1.8 billion.
The 2013 Global Connections Survey results also show just under half of Scotland's international exports went to countries within the European Union.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/business/business-news/value-scottish-exports-rose-record-5044280

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

I had a nervous moment just then, when I read Shakey's comment:

"Anyway, the SNP, .... are fairly good at running countries." because I thought I agreed with her.

But then I realised it was "running" and not "ruining".

I've recovered now.

You're ok. Still suffering from anti-SNP delusions and random rants devoid of much in the way of facts. But am glad you've partially recovered from your 'wee turn'.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

$100+ per barrel as boom times rather than the norm. ]

Shame the SNP needed oil at $113 per barrel or higher just to keep the Scottish deficit to within striking distance of the UK one then....

At $50 a barrel, an iScotland would have a budget deficit of circa 12% to 15% of GDP, and circa 25% of government spending.

Oil revenues this year may be as low as $1.5bn.... Versus £12bn in 2008.

If you don't understand how devastating that is, for a tiny country with a £17bn deficit between onshore tax revenue and government spending, well.... I can't see how you can deny just how impossible the situation would be.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

while Scotland is part of the UK, Scotland has very little chance of ever transitioning away from reliance on oil prices.

That's the entire point Shakey, Scotland as part of the Uk isn't reliant on oil prices at all!!!

We get our funding regardless of whether oil is $50 or $150, we don't have to fund a $15.5bn deficit when oil drops to $50..... And the UK can afford it as oil revenues are only 1% of GDP, versus 15% to 20% of GDP for Scotland.

Being able to focus on other economic areas in order to build those up.. is one of the actual points of FFA and independence.

Like what?

What on earth do you think an iScotland could do to meaningfully boost the economy that we cannot already do now?

Sprinkle fairy dust?

I can point out that being small and independent didn't work out so well for the 'arc of prosperity' nations Salmond used to be so keen on hyping.....

Things staying as they are re the status quo economically, means Scotland will never be able transition and build up growth in other important areas as it would like... And it would like.

How is the UK stopping us growing today?

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Shame the SNP needed oil at $113 per barrel or higher just to keep the Scottish deficit to within striking distance of the UK one then....

At $50 a barrel, an iScotland would have a budget deficit of circa 12% to 15% of GDP, and circa 25% of government spending.

Oil revenues this year may be as low as $1.5bn.... Versus £12bn in 2008.

If you don't understand how devastating that is, for a tiny country with a £17bn deficit between onshore tax revenue and government spending, well.... I can't see how you can deny just how impossible the situation would be.

the SNP are only concerned about the hatred of the English and their own huge inferiority complex :
economics and the well being of the people living in Scotland has nothing to do with their wish for independence:
as history repeatedly shows us, ideology and malice justify any sacrifice (as along as made by the ordinary people).
long live socialism and nationalism