Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

It will be interesting to see how things progress. Independence simply isn't tenable but is the reason the SNP exists.

How does the SNP move from a party of revolution to a party of management without upsetting too many of the 45%?

They've kept the 45% happy enough yesterday. Imo they'll go to the public and ask what they want to see. Then beat Osborne at his own game by producing a 'long term economic plan' laying it ALL out on the line warts and all, as well as basing projections on low or minimal oil prices. Currency and pensions being paramount. There will probably be much greater involvement of the Scottish Fiscal Commission now that it's been legislated for in terms of being an independent body from the Scottish Govt. And a little less reliance on GERS reports ( which include many estimates ) regarding Scotland's standing every year. Or at least, in spelling out what cuts are coming down the line directly from Westminster which affect the Scottish budget.

March 11, 2016

Legislation to give the Scottish Fiscal Commission a permanent basis in statute and ensure its independence has been passed by the Scottish Parliament today. As set out in the fiscal framework, a series of amendments have been made to the bill which mean the commission will prepare independent tax revenue forecasts which will inform the Scottish Budget.

http://www.scottishlegal.com/2016/03/11/scottish-fiscal-commission-given-permanent-basis-in-statute/


I do think that the SNP has been using a softly, softly don't scare the horses approach over the last year in order to maintain their voters for the upcoming election. After which, if they retain a majority, then the gloves will come off regarding Westminster and the other parties in Scotland. We may even see some more radical policies introduced which they couldn't possibly countenance in the run up to May this year for fear of losing their overall majority :- Holyrood isn't set up to have any party in power with one, and it's a difficult feat to do once, let alone twice. Whatever the polls say. We tend to forget that these days.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

We may even seem some more radical policies introduced which they couldn't possibly countenance in the run up to May this year for fear of losing their overall majority :- Holyrood isn't set up to have any party in power with one, and it's a difficult feat to do once, let alone twice. Whatever the polls say. We tend to forget that these days.

almost inconceivable that the SNP will introduce any radical policies after May
They know that this is their only real chance of trying for a new referendum: that will be the priority

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Then beat Osborne at his own game by producing a 'long term economic plan' laying it ALL out on the line warts and all, as well as basing projections on low or minimal oil prices.

Requires more than a long term plan. Requires immediate action. As the world isn't standing still waiting. Deficit reduction is being tackled every day at grass roots level.

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Requires more than a long term plan. Requires immediate action. As the world isn't standing still waiting. Deficit reduction is being tackled every day at grass roots level.

Well since the Scottish Govt won't even be collecting taxes until 2017 it would be kind of hard to start right away reducing deficits. Especially one's that don't actually exist since Scotland is still part of the UK. This hypothetical 15 billion if it's to be taken at face value won't actually exist until Scotland actually does vote for independence. At the present time it's theoretical, as well as questionable.

I get the impression from a glance about today at various commentary on Sturgeon's speech and announcement yesterday, that while the usual unionist and mainstream writers and bloggers are holding their heads in their hands crying 'oh dear god no, when will this ever STOP'.... The actual grass roots are firing up the cylinders again. Most assuming that the SNP/Yes now have the benefit of experience on their side. Sturgeon can't be demonised the same way Salmond was. Labour will be far too scared to take part in any new BetterTogether. Which leaves.. the Tories to do all the campaigning :eek: Doesn't look that good does it. I also doubt any future Yes campaign will be anywhere near as happy clappy as the last one in terms of relentless positivity re Westminster at least.

We have the advantage of the experience of the last time to build upon. As someone who was born cynical and has only got even more cynical with age, the happy clappy fluffy bunniness of the official Yes campaign last time seemed to try and counter the inevitable negativity of the No campaign with an unremitting positivity. Next time we need to go on the offensive, and be less afraid to be offensive about the negativities of remaining a part of the UK..

However the problem during the last campaign was that by punting the currency union issue the Scottish government was depending on cooperation from the British government...The lesson to take from this episode is that we must fight the next campaign on a basis of zero cooperation,

https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2016/03/13/making-the-beautiful-dream-walk-and-dance/

Still, best to get the May election, then the Eu referendum over with first. Let's hope there are no huge shocks in the second of those.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

They've kept the 45% happy enough yesterday. Imo they'll go to the public and ask what they want to see. Then beat Osborne at his own game by producing a 'long term economic plan' laying it ALL out on the line warts and all, as well as basing projections on low or minimal oil prices. Currency and pensions being paramount. There will probably be much greater involvement of the Scottish Fiscal Commission now that it's been legislated for in terms of being an independent body from the Scottish Govt. And a little less reliance on GERS reports ( which include many estimates ) regarding Scotland's standing every year. Or at least, in spelling out what cuts are coming down the line directly from Westminster which affect the Scottish budget.

March 11, 2016http://www.scottishlegal.com/2016/03/11/scottish-fiscal-commission-given-permanent-basis-in-statute/


I do think that the SNP has been using a softly, softly don't scare the horses approach over the last year in order to maintain their voters for the upcoming election. After which, if they retain a majority, then the gloves will come off regarding Westminster and the other parties in Scotland. We may even see some more radical policies introduced which they couldn't possibly countenance in the run up to May this year for fear of losing their overall majority :- Holyrood isn't set up to have any party in power with one, and it's a difficult feat to do once, let alone twice. Whatever the polls say. We tend to forget that these days.

So the plan is to lie about intentions after the election and then discard most policies and start fighting with anyone you can find. Hmm. Doesn't sound very productive.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Well since the Scottish Govt won't even be collecting taxes until 2017 it would be kind of hard to start right away reducing deficits.

Not that simple. Deficit reduction can be addressed in a multitude of ways. Most from sound financial management. Pulling a big solitary lever doesn't work. As will have spin off consequences.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

So the plan is to lie about intentions after the election and then discard most policies and start fighting with anyone you can find. Hmm. Doesn't sound very productive.

Works a treat for the Tories. No top down reorganisation of the NHS and all that.

But no, I was talking about localised taxes. They've made many hints that council taxes and they way they're going to deal with them at the moment is only a temporary state of affairs. There were many on the left of the SNP, Greens and other people very disappointed with their announcement on that recently and said they should've been more radical. Now isn't the time.

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Not that simple. Deficit reduction can be addressed in a multitude of ways. Most from sound financial management. Pulling a big solitary lever doesn't work. As will have spin off consequences.

Get back to us all with your ideas once the Scottish Govt actually has a few levers. At the moment, and even with the new Scotland Act, Westminster will still be running the bulk of the Scottish economy. Any hypothetical deficits Scotland has currently, come from there. Same as for anywhere else in the UK. The Scottish Govt get a block grant and are allowed to allocate it at the moment. End of story.

The fact that Scottish revenues according to GERS *the gospel of all that is true* only fell 1% last year despite the oil price tanking is a sign of good onshore fundamentals going forward. GERS and deficits will of course have to be addressed should it look like a referendum is in the offing in the near future. One can only hope that the SNP go for trashing the source and endlessly casting doubt/questioning the figures on the true validity of the accountancy next time round ( like everyone else does), rather than remaining a bit happy clappy about them. They need to start questioning these estimates and be seen to do so themselves rather than leaving it to other pro-independence sources. It's not like the other side of the debate have any qualms about headlining them and splashing them on front pages. Is well past time the SNP went on the attack a bit there rather than the defensive.

*GERS is an accountancy snapshot containing a host of estimates and vaguely compiled money spent on 'Scotland's behalf' (some 40% of GERS figs ). Economics and economies are a bit more dynamic and fluid in nature. Let's face it if Osbourne can go from 27bn to spare to an 18bn black hole in 4 months according to the OBR. There's hope for Scotland yet going in the other direction.

elantan

I would still rather have all the tax from our oil than just 8% of the tax ... but I'm more happy if it stays in the ground for now

Generali

elantan wrote: »

I would still rather have all the tax from our oil than just 8% of the tax ... but I'm more happy if it stays in the ground for now

The trouble is that at the same time Scotland misses out on c. 10% of London's income tax, VAT and so on.

Put it this way, if Scotland was becoming independent in 10 days I really wouldn't want to be on an NHS waiting list in the north of England.