Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
cashinmattress

Mps’ Call For End Of Cash Flow To Scots

Recommended Posts

MPs’ call for end of cash flow to Scots

Justice select committee findings suggest time has come for change and that new formula must account for poorest in England

The Barnett formula, which gives Scots 20% more funding per head than people in England, is “no longer fit for purpose” and should be replaced, a Commons report has concluded.

The findings of a justice select committee study into 10 years of devolution says there should be an overhaul of how Britain is governed, arguing that England has been given a raw deal since the Scottish parliament and Welsh assembly were created.

It says reform of the Barnett formula is overdue because the way in which funds are allocated to Scotland from Westminster lacks logic, and urges the government to devise a new formula, based on need and which will take better account of poverty in England.

The funding arrangement under Barnett gives Scots £1,644 more per head than people south of the border.

The report also questions the need for a Scottish secretary to represent Scotland in the UK cabinet because devolution has drastically reduced the workload. The post is held by Jim Murphy.

“Many have questioned whether it is justified for those parts of the UK that have devolved government, and only those parts, to have individual secretaries of state in the cabinet,” it states.

“As relationships between the administrations mature, the role of secretary of state for Scotland has clearly decreased, and the question of the continued separate existence of that office must be raised.”

Sir Alan Beith MP, chairman of the committee, said devolution changed the way Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland were administered, but left England “stuck in a pre-devolution time warp”.

“The funding formula is also a relic from earlier times, taking no account of the current need of the various nations and regions of the United Kingdom,” he said.

The report found that the solution might be the appointment of a single constitutional minister with responsibility for devolved government.

Mike Russell, the SNP’s Scottish government minister for the constitution, seized on comments over the future of the Scottish secretary.

“A far better arrangement would be to replace the post of Scottish secretary with a system whereby the devolved administrations have a direct relationship with 10 Downing Street through the Cabinet Office,” he said.

“And the best relationship between Scotland and England is an equal partnership — a social union of independent nations — with the Queen as our shared head of state. In effect, united kingdoms rather than the United Kingdom.”

Evidence produced for a House of Lords inquiry in March found that public spending in Scotland should be cut by £5 billion a year to plug a black hole in Britain’s finances and to give a fairer deal to parts of England.

The Centre for Economic and Business Research told peers on the committee investigating the Barnett formula that Londoners were subsidising the rest of Britain by up to £30 billion a year.

There is growing concern among English politicians and pressure groups, who regard Scotland’s higher share of spending as unsustainable in the longer term.

The cross-party Calman Commission, reviewing the powers of the Scottish parliament, is expected to recommend giving the Scottish parliament more fiscal powers so that Holyrood becomes less dependent on English taxpayers for funding.

Well, in the short term it would spell disaster, and bring the economy up here to its knees. Long term? Not sure.

Full devolution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MPs’ call for end of cash flow to Scots

Well, in the short term it would spell disaster, and bring the economy up here to its knees.

Nah.

That cash is largely wasted, because it's spent by the public sector. Seriously, without the Barnett formula, Scotland's state-run schools will still be terrible, hospitals will still struggle to keep wards clean, and the roads will still be inadequate. Councils will still prefer to spend taxpayers money on translating documents into Mongolian and hiring one-legged lesbian diversity outreach co-ordinators.

Some people foolishly believe that the massive public sector albatross around Scotland's neck is some sort of boon. It isn't - it's an integral part of the reason why economic growth, and thus living standards, in Scotland have trailed England's since WW2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did warn what was coming on another thread.

My view is that the 3 trillion debts of RBS & BOS will be used as a bargaining counter by a future Conservative government in order to drastically cut the public sector gravy train that has fuelled Scotlands economy for the last 10 years.

Any predictions what effect this will have on house prices north of the border?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I did warn what was coming on another thread.

My view is that the 3 trillion debts of RBS & BOS will be used as a bargaining counter by a future Conservative government in order to drastically cut the public sector gravy train that has fuelled Scotlands economy for the last 10 years.

Any predictions what effect this will have on house prices north of the border?

Ach laddie, things are different here, ken?

Willied.mid-size.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LongBlackKilt
My view is that the 3 trillion debts of RBS & BOS will be used as a bargaining counter by a future Conservative government in order to drastically cut the public sector gravy train that has fuelled Scotlands economy for the last 10 years.

Nice of the Unionists to absorb this trainwreck on their shift, thus making an independent Scotland responsible for 9% or so of the burden. So that's one problem ironed out into a nice predictability.

The lavish overpayment for the Scottish Parliament building was another nice gesture. [it might otherwise have been left to the post-colonial elite.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some people foolishly believe that the massive public sector albatross around Scotland's neck is some sort of boon. It isn't - it's an integral part of the reason why economic growth, and thus living standards, in Scotland have trailed England's since WW2.

+1.

The short term pain of slashing Scotlands public spending would be worth it for the long term gains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LongBlackKilt
QUOTE (Salty @ May 24 2009, 03:50 PM) *

Some people foolishly believe that the massive public sector albatross around Scotland's neck is some sort of boon. It isn't - it's an integral part of the reason why economic growth, and thus living standards, in Scotland have trailed England's since WW2.

+1.

The short term pain of slashing Scotlands public spending would be worth it for the long term gains.

Now we're waiting for the McSlavish answer as to why Scottish population growth has trailed England's since 1707. Around 20% in 1707 when we joined the United Kingdom. Now [scraping up all residents] it's nearer 9%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now we're waiting for the McSlavish answer as to why Scottish population growth has trailed England's since 1707. Around 20% in 1707 when we joined the United Kingdom. Now [scraping up all residents] it's nearer 9%.

Too pisxed to get a stiffie?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LongBlackKilt
Too pisxed to get a stiffie?

Nope. I suppose the gentlemen-in-Whitehall's idea of a fair rate of exchange just boosted the export of our "products" too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nope. I suppose the gentlemen-in-Whitehall's idea of a fair rate of exchange just boosted the export of our "products" too much.

:)

It's a shame the English don't export anything anyone else wants. Food - No, Drink - No, Cars - No, Oil - No.

England IMO is finished. It's a non country with nothing to offer.

Edited by Wait & See

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:)

It's a shame the English don't export anything anyone else wants. Food - No, Drink - No, Cars - No, Oil - No.

England IMO is finished. It's a non country with nothing to offer.

Agreed. What's often touted as being good about Ingerland is often quite cr@p when you stop to look at how things really are.

The royal family

The mother of all parliaments

Its culture

The legal system

The educational system

The National Health system

Sense of community

Not a huge amount to be proud of there. Trouble is, Scotland won't get independence until the oil runs out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed. What's often touted as being good about Ingerland is often quite cr@p when you stop to look at how things really are.

The royal family

The mother of all parliaments

Its culture

The legal system

The educational system

The National Health system

Sense of community

Not a huge amount to be proud of there. Trouble is, Scotland won't get independence until the oil runs out.

Bet there's a few more undiscovered wells out there. No doubt about it actually. ;)

Edited by Wait & See

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MPs’ call for end of cash flow to Scots

Well, in the short term it would spell disaster, and bring the economy up here to its knees. Long term? Not sure.

Full devolution?

really need to go one better than that don't they?

a lot of the money going to scotland is siphoned from england via the EU and re-distributed to scotland/wales/NI as regional entities.

so you need to pull the plug on the EU first.

seeing as we are the third largest contributor,it would put the rest of the project in a bit of a pickle too,and would probably give us a great deal more leverage.

would be nice if france put their penneth-worth in too......much as we ain't the best of bedfellows,the french are none too keen on overly-dictatorial governments either,we do at least have that in common......so a little financial arm-twisting might get the PTB to reconsider their approach to the union.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FFS another rabid anti-scots thread - you guys do know that in terms of per capita public spending Scotland trails behind....

Belfast

London.. (WTF) London!! Naw cannae be - that shining example of european financial success!!

The question you should be asking is why does the level of spending per capita vary so FKING much across the regions of England.

Jeez - is this the level this once great site is getting to?

Edited by Krackersdave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FFS another rabid anti-scots thread - you guys do know that in terms of per capita public spending Scotland trails behind....

Belfast

London.. (WTF) London!! Naw cannae be - that shining example of european financial success!!

The question you should be asking is why does the level of spending per capita vary so FKING much across the regions of England.

Jeez - is this the level this once great site is getting to?

Yes.

It's the Jocks what done it. The Jocks in Northern Rock and Bradford and Bingley brought down the Britain. The Jocks in Halifax brought down the Bank of Scotland and Halifax. The Jocks in Lloyds brought down Lloyds. The Jocks in London created the housing bubble. The Jocks forced Blair to lead the Ooh Kay into war. The Jocks get 5 times the benefits of London. The Jocks is 2012 Olympics innit. Their fault. Is the Jocks wot coz the oil price. Yez we must kick them out and steal their water what done it. Bring back Thatch she wot innit show 'em.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“England IMO is finished. It's a non country with nothing to offer.”

“Agreed. What's often touted as being good about Ingerland is often quite cr@p when you stop to look at how things really are.”

Your ignorance is your problem.

If you could but you probably can’t because your concentration skills are woeful, read

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/ind...howtopic=114926

then go away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed. What's often touted as being good about Ingerland is often quite cr@p when you stop to look at how things really are.

The royal family she wears more than one crown you know!

The mother of all parliaments Now on the mend bless her

Its culture is there an equivalent word in Gaelic?

The legal system Oh dear, knock off a bobby's hat down in the smoke perhaps?

The educational system and yet it produced both Will Self and Carol Vorderman

The National Health system Service!

Sense of community now that is wrong, there are hundreds of different communities in every street

Not a huge amount to be proud of there. Trouble is, Scotland won't get independence until the oil runs out.

...You forgot to say we all look funny and the food is inedible.

Independence is there for the asking, it's self determination and is NOT* something that can be withheld by some non-existent boogieman.

edited to add "NOT"...

Edited by Bring forth the guillotine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Don't the French call us 'The United Kingdoms' (implying we're not)?”

I am afraid not.

The French call us “Le Royaume-Uni”

If it was the United Kingdoms it would be,

“Les Royaumes-Unis”.

Le Royaume-Uni (nom officiel : le Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'Irlande du Nord) est un État indépendant d'Europe de l'Ouest créé en 1707, composé de la Grande-Bretagne (Angleterre, Écosse et Pays de Galles) et de l’Irlande du Nord et membre de l'Union européenne depuis 1973.

Source, idiots guide to life, my favourite.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royaume-Uni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The funding arrangement under Barnett gives Scots £1,644 more per head than people south of the border.

What was the original justification for this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   291 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.