formula

One moment the SNP want out of the UK (which would have automatically taken Scotland out of the EU) and now they don't want out the EU?

not2old

how will the SNP respond?

Cameron tells Scottish Government stop talking about more powers and start using the ones you have | Herald Scotland

"DAVID Cameron has issued a direct challenge to the SNP Government to "stop talking and start acting" on Holyrood's extra powers as he set out his administration's legislative programme."

"Devolution is not just about getting new powers, it's also about the responsibility of how those powers are used," declared Mr Cameron.

"I would say to the SNP - if you're not happy with decisions made here in Westminster, if you want more taxes, more spending and more borrowing, you can now introduce those measures in Scotland. It's time for you to stop talking and start acting," he said to Tory cheers.

The PM also decried the SNP proposal for full fiscal autonomy, saying it would mean almost £10 billion in higher taxes or in extra cuts; equivalent to £5,000 per Scottish household.

He said it was ironic that the party which claimed to represent Scotland "advocated a worse deal for Scotland than the rest of us do".

formula

It's sadly becoming very clear now that although the SNP want fiscal autonomy they do not want fiscal responsibility for Scotland. It doesn't bode well for an independent Scotland with this batch of MPs. The 'No' voters were wise.

not2old

another way of saying it '$hit or get off the pot'

By the end of this term the SNP with its all 56 seats are likely to have to 'grin & bear it' IMO, all because Westminster rules (with no support from Labour) & just in case the SNP need to tell Scotland 'we need to raise taxes to give you a liveable wage', we will also need to cut benefits, remove free education & possibly now need to pay co-op healthcare user fees... no more free NHS in Scotland.

Welcome to your freedom [in part] from Westminster

Just surmising....

formula

The SNP have now been offered the powers to run Scotland with even more powers than they asked for, but now don't want it and would rather to be tied to the UK instead. All very strange. Surely they haven't just done their sums? They must have realised when they campaigned for an independent Scotland that they would lose the subsidy Scotland is given by the richer countries and therefore have to make some unpopular choices. Didn't they?

From the article below
"If you factor in its share of oil revenue, Scotland has been a net contributor to Britain’s coffers in three of the last 15 years. For the other 12, oil hasn’t been sufficient to offset the fact that the Scottish government spends £1,450 more and raises £250 less per person than the rest of the UK. "

All the claims the SNP made to try to get a Scotland Yes vote seem to be unraveling, as summed up in part in this article.
Nicola Sturgeon protests too much about Alistair Carmichael » The Spectator

formula

A blog from one of the Scots who can do maths.

Clearly for the SNP the undeniable reality of the FFA figures is a huge problem, particularly given the boldness of their referendum rhetoric. Remember:

"We paid more tax per head of population every year for the past 34 years."
"We send more to Westminster than we get back"
"Independence would have made Scotland £8.3bn better off over the last 5 years"
"Scotland is the 14th richest country in the world"
"Oil is just a bonus"

It must be pretty difficult for Yes voters who were won over by these oft repeated sound-bites to understand how we can now see that a Fully Fiscally Autonomous Scotland would be c.£8bn a year worse off.
chokka blog


Some pretty big cuts and tax rises for the SNP to make to fill that 8bn a year black hole that Scotland has. No wonder Sturgeon won't take the fully fiscally autonomous Scotland she asked for and has now been offered.

Now Sturgeon is saying that the rich countries of the UK should continue to subsidise Scotland and keep paying the Barnett formula money to Scotland. She has finally realised what many people (including many Scots) already knew, that Scotland's economic shortfall has been paid by the other countries in the union. A reality check for Sturgeon and a far cry from the wild claims she and the SNP made before, when they talked about all the wealth of Scotland to try to get a Yes vote.

From that blog, the links that go with the SNP claims in quotes above.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2...tland-32171887
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/SNP%3A...k.-a0177531147
http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/201...etter-off.html
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politi...y-snp.23668163
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/...cle1290543.ece

scot47

Hazelnut tells us

"As a direct result of SNP policies my home has been greatly devalued and both MrH's job and mine are under threat. We ar slowly losing everything we have spent our whole working lives working for. We were praying for the Westminster vote not to be such a landslide of minority votes allowing majority representation but we were sadly diappointed. "

It really is very naughty of those horrid Scots to take actions that lead to her assets being worth less. Heartless ! Will she cut her losses and move to her dream home in NZ ?

scot47

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=1&theater

The myth of "Scottish Subsidy Junkies" is so ingrained in the Home Counties that I fear you lot will never see things the way they really are !

Hazelnut

As you seem to be ridiculing my post I wanted to reply. The Scottish people are not horrid. There are some less pleasant members of that ethnic origin in the same way as there are less pleasant members of every grouping I've ever encountered but the Scots are a welcoming and friendly people.

The SNP policies that would mean job and home loss for me are from a minority, extremist group that seem to have manipulated their way into power.

As for whether we move or not you have as much idea as I do as to whether that will happen

not2old

This cannae be right,devolution without the Barnet formula & Westminster continued support... its just not going to happen laddie!

SNP has | Herald Scotland

"Ahead of the first major debate today on the new Scotland Bill, giving Holyrood more tax powers, the Scottish Liberal Democrats seized on remarks made by Tommy Sheppard, the Nationalist MP for Edinburgh East, who suggested achieving FFA was "a process", that could take at least three or four years to implement; meaning it was unlikely to happen before 2020.

Asked on the BBC why the SNP was now rowing back on its manifesto pledge of FFA, Mr Sheppard, his party's spokesman on constitutional matters, said: "Having a government being able to be responsible not just for spending money but for raising money is surely something that's an ideal situation and it's one we want to move towards but we don't do that and achieve that until we have the economic powers to be able to manage the Scottish economy in the interests of the people that live there. So we want additional powers to set minimum wages, much more powers on the tax structure, powers to borrow, powers to invest."

But when asked about whether it was motivated by fears of losing the Barnett Formula - the Institute for Fiscal Studies has estimated FFA would cost Scotland £8bn a year in lost revenue - he replied: "But, of course, you wouldn't take these things away overnight - that would be a disaster; it would be a silly thing to do. So we have to prepare the ground for full financial responsibility and we will be bringing forward amendments to make those changes and prepare the ground."

Ian Murray, the Shadow Scottish Secretary, noted how the SNP might only have the legislative opportunity of the Scotland Bill to push for FFA in this Parliament, which runs to the end of the decade.

Pointing to the SNP manifesto, he said:"Both Nicola Sturgeon and candidates, who were standing for the SNP, consistently said, time and time again during the election, that they would vote this year for FFA. They are rowing back on that because they know the sums don't add up."

sallysimmons

Very good post (from one Yorkshirewoman who would quite like to come with you!).

I have several English friends/relatives who now live in Scotland and they all voted for independence in the referendum. Primary drivers were a) not wanting to leave the EU and fearing the English would vote for that and b) dislike of the English attitude to immigrants. But over and above all that was the shared belief that the Tory government had no clue about, and no interest in, their lives.

robin1234

I've thought about this, where would I stand if I lived in Scotland. I find the SNP attractive for your reasons (a), (b) and (c) and might vote SNP rather than Labour. But they seem to be really bad and irrelevant reasons to vote for independence in a referendum! History shows that the political pendulum swings back and forth every decade or so, whereas a decision for independence is forever.

scot47

Wee Ginger Dug: Cheers drown last chance of the Union | Comment | The National

formula

They must really hate the Scots. An independant Scotland has a gaping 8.1 billion black hole in their economy, which would have meant massive cuts and taxes rises in Scotland. Your English friends/relatives could have run home when things got too bad, but pity the poor Scots who voted NO when that lot hit and they were stuck in Scotland with their Scottish only passport.

formula

The Yes voters may be shocked but I don't think many others will be. Although offered everything they asked for and more by Westmister for Scotland to have FFA, the SNP have decided not to take this when they learned that a FFA Scotland would not continue to have their 8.1 billion blackhole in the Scottish economy, plugged by the English anymore.

As Sturgeon got more than a bit upset when she found out Scotland would be given just a few million short or that 8.1 billion his year, it is clear there was no way she could cope with losing 8.1 billion if the SNP took the offer of FFA for Scotland. No wonder the other MPs have been goading the SNP in parliament, to take all the powers that Scotland have been offered.

It's not going well for Sturgeon. After she decided to not take FFA for Scotland after all, Sturgeon announced that she still wanted Scotish MPs to vote on English and Welsh only matters, even though the English and Welsh MPs can't vote on Scotland matters. So she got upset again today when she heard that England and Wales will now be given more powers to start to bring them up to Scotland's level of power: meaning her Scottish MPs will no longer be able to vote on English and Welsh only matters. Not that Sturgeon could have voted anyway as she isn't an elected MP.

Labour weren't too pleased about this news either as the West Lothian question has now been answered. England isn't a Labour majority country, that is (or was) Scotland. This news means no more future Labour governments using the Scottish MPs votes to force through laws on England and Wales anymore, i.e university fees for England and Wales, but not Scotland.

NI saying they aren't ready for more powers yet.

It seems that Cameron giving Scotland the vote on independence has worked out well for the rest of the UK, especially England. Labour always refused to give devolved powers to England because Labour wouldn't control England (anyone who earns 10k or more is better off under the Conservatives). But Labour gave devolved powers to the other 3 union countries, with extra powers given to Scotland as they always voted Labour.

I'm not sure how Labour got away with being so undemocratic for so long, but nicely played Cameron It's not the rest of the UKs fault if Scotland now don't want FFA on offer, but Wales and England will take the extra powers on offer.