Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

SNP 'will not back Scotland Bill without agreement on budget'

The Scottish Government could reject more powers for Scotland in little more than two weeks unless an agreement is reached on the amount of money it will receive from Westminster, John Swinney has warned.
The Deputy First Minister said negotiations are reaching "the end of the road" and has set a February 12 deadline.
He confirmed the SNP administration will not back the Scotland Bill until it finds the associated cut to Scotland's block grant acceptable...


At the committee meeting in Perth, convener Pete Wishart (SNP) asked "how serious" the Scottish Government's threat to veto the Scotland Bill is.

He said: "Would that therefore mean that the Scotland Bill, as it is currently being progressed through the House of Commons, would effectively fall?"
Mr Swinney said: "We would not put the question of legislative consent to the Scottish Parliament without being able, at the same time, to recommend an acceptable fiscal framework for implementation alongside the Scotland Bill provisions.

"So the answer to your question, convener, is yes

Oh dear.
The thought of part cutting the Barnett umbilical cord with the rUK has the SNP a tad worried that Scotland can`t make up the difference despite being able to spend Scottish income tax receipts.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Monday 18 Jan 2016http://www.bqlive.co.uk/2016/01/18/start-ups-continue-to-invest-in-scotland/

Scottish Enterprise is Government funded.

Ah part of the Startup Britain Initiative.

"Founded by eight entrepreneurs and launched in March 2011 by the Prime Minister, StartUp Britain is completely private sector funded, and was launched in response to the government’s call for an ‘enterprise led’ recovery."

Nice to see that Scottish Government is supporting this. That subsidy must come in handy sometimes.

Say Thank you to the nice Mr Cameron Shakey. All part of being better together.

Shakethedisease

Rinoa wrote: »

I would imagine Glasgow and Edinburgh to be around the fifth and sixth largest cities in the UK.
Well done SNP. :j

I think they were talking about start up %'s. Not population numbers. But an improvement whatever. I agree with you. Well done SNP. :beer:

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

This is where any Westminster money should go. There isn't any point in pumping money into loss making oil rigs in the North Sea. Let the economic ones roll out because you can't just switch them off.

You yourself Shakey has said Scotland's independent future is not dependent on oil.

Scotland will diversify the economy and UK will save by reducing the subsidy.

Scotland will do it's best to diversify under current conditions. But if the Scotland Bill isn't agreed there will be no reduction in 'subsidy' ( otherwise known as the Barnett Formula ).

Independence would be better for getting rid of that, if that's what you'd like to see ?

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

Oh dear.
The thought of part cutting the Barnett umbilical cord with the rUK has the SNP a tad worried that Scotland can`t make up the difference despite being able to spend Scottish income tax receipts.

Nah. Scotland was promised further powers, that Barnett would continue and nothing that would make Scotland significantly worse off under the union.

Am afraid a No vote based on day to day 'economic circumstances' and fears of being terribly worse off...just doesn't square up to Scotland being millions of pounds down progressively each year. <--- That in fact, was supposed to be what happened after a Yes vote.

If Scotland will be significantly worse off due to the new Scotland Bill. Then it won't get through. It wasn't what was promised to those who put their trust in Westminster. The very fact that Ian Murray and Scottish Labour are having hysterics over the fact that it hasn't gone through yet... would be setting alarm bells and big flashing lights off to me. They wanted to use it as a big stick to beat the SNP with and regain support over the coming years.

Basic reading from the hysterics is the fact the Scotland Bill and the fiscal framework round it... will probably be very bad for Scots economically and progressively over the years. Also electorally for the SNP who have to use these new powers. Scottish Labour is hoping beyond hope to benefit from the above. In fact, I think they may have built their entire Holyrood 16 campaign around it.

Still, there's time yet to reach an agreement. But Swinney has said from the time of the Smith Commission that he won't be signing off on anything that would disadvantage Scots resulting from the Vow/Smith/Scotland Act. People didn't vote for that at ALL. Yes or No voters. And he's been very consistent. The SNP probably guessed as much at the time.

21 January 2016

By all accounts, though, the talks have not been easy. If an agreement is not reached by February 12th, the Scottish Government will not sign it off and the Scotland Bill will not proceed. Scotland will then go to the polls with the SNP being able to accuse the unionist parties of reneging on the Vow. That would not be a good position for the Tories or Labour to be in.

“One of my big irritants over my whole time as Finance Secretary in the Scottish Government is that the financial rules in which I operate are as a result of a conversation between the Treasury and the Secretary of State for Scotland. I am a consultee but I am not a signatory, all because of some bizarre and absurd rules within that statement of funding policy.


"The great thing the Smith Commission said was that there has to be a fiscal framework agreed between the two governments and I will just not agree to a fiscal framework that is not consistent with Smith.
“If we do not have an agreement before the 12th of February then I will not put a legislative consent motion to the parliament and if it is not put by the 12th then it can’t be considered before dissolution.


“I want there to be an agreement and I have signalled to anyone that has asked me, I have said that. But I sat through the whole of the Smith Commission and read newspaper article after newspaper article that said I would walk out and I sat through the whole thing and was signatory to the agreement and while it wouldn’t surprise anyone to know it is not the sum of all my ambitions, I will not see it implemented prejudicially to the interests of Scotland.”

https://www.holyrood.com/articles/inside-politics/exclusive-john-swinney-his-latest-budget-and-fiscal-framework

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

Ah part of the Startup Britain Initiative.

"Founded by eight entrepreneurs and launched in March 2011 by the Prime Minister, StartUp Britain is completely private sector funded, and was launched in response to the government’s call for an ‘enterprise led’ recovery."

Nice to see that Scottish Government is supporting this. That subsidy must come in handy sometimes.

Say Thank you to the nice Mr Cameron Shakey. All part of being better together.

No. Have a reread. They weren't mentioned in any funding. Just doing the research on the numbers at companies house. The funding was down to others. Including Scottish Enterprise ( Scottish Govt ). Do check again.

“I applied and secured funding from a number of sources; LAUNCH.ed, SIE, Converge Challenge, Royal Society of Edinburgh, Innovate UK and Scottish Enterprise.

“The funding on offer in Scotland for an early stage start-up is excellent and all of the funding comes with training and support. As the business progresses this initial support has been key to the success of the business.

I live near an industrial park. We walk our dog there daily in among all the sad forgotten factories of yesteryear .. ( I worked at a few of them ). There's a bright new shiny Business and Enterprise building. Built from scratch after knocking down one of the old falling down warehouses, and opened about a year ago. There's even a working wind turbine outside and solar panels on it ! Billboards on the roads into town from all directions advertising it as well. The car park always seems pretty full.. ( Start up Britain isn't on any of the billboards either ). Also there's usually an ad on local radio during the school run for those thinking of setting themselves up. Office space, mentoring and funding to get them going.

A step in the right direction anyway.

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Scotland will do it's best to diversify under current conditions. But if the Scotland Bill isn't agreed there will be no reduction in 'subsidy' ( otherwise known as the Barnett Formula ).

Independence would be better for getting rid of that, if that's what you'd like to see ?

Independence is a matter for you Guys, and if Swinney`s desperation to keep the subsidy is anything to go by then it ain't happening. He`s not exactly putting forward the notion of a nation-in-waiting with any confidence is he?
The loss of Barnett block grant payments commensurate with amount of income tax you receive via the Scots people seems reasonable to me. I have a feeling that even if the SNP got all the powers they wanted, they still wouldn't feel confident enough to not want a bung from the rUK.
A bit of savage indictment on your ability to go it alone this Shakey.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

No. Have a reread. They weren't mentioned in any funding. Just doing the research on the numbers at companies house. The funding was down to others. Including Scottish Enterprise ( Scottish Govt ). Do check again.


I live near an industrial park. We walk our dog there daily in among all the sad forgotten factories of yesteryear .. ( I worked at a few of them ). There's a bright new shiny Business and Enterprise building. Built from scratch after knocking down one of the old falling down warehouses, and opened about a year ago. There's even a working wind turbine outside and solar panels on it ! Billboards on the roads into town from all directions advertising it as well. The car park always seems pretty full.. ( Start up Britain isn't on any of the billboards either ). Also there's usually an ad on local radio during the school run for those thinking of setting themselves up. Office space, mentoring and funding to get them going.

A step in the right direction anyway.

so it looks like scotland is doing fantastically well within the union.

well done scotland

kabayiri

Tromking wrote: »

Independence is a matter for you Guys, and if Swinney`s desperation to keep the subsidy is anything to go by then it ain't happening. He`s not exactly putting forward the notion of a nation-in-waiting with any confidence is he?
The loss of Barnett block grant payments commensurate with amount of income tax you receive via the Scots people seems reasonable to me. I have a feeling that even if the SNP got all the powers they wanted, they still wouldn't feel confident enough to not want a bung from the rUK.
A bit of savage indictment on your ability to go it alone this Shakey.

Agree.

Scotland's economy will have to go through a transformation if they are to be ready for independence.

Right now they have a problem with jobs around the oil industry. They have a lot of people working in public sector roles for the whole of the UK; this would go come independence; we would be competing economies. It's only natural rUK would seek to win jobs back.

A period of cold turkey is not a bad thing for any economy. It's a shame this is not the way the SNP thinks.

Mistermeaner

Agreed. Snp should prove Scotland's ability to go it alone by voluntarily returning the Barnett cash and raising special taxes to cover the gap while they reduce spending.

I'm sure the power is there to do this; they just need to make it happen. Isn't this what the polls say the people of Scotland want?