I can't help but share this from The National in Scotland today, for whom I wrote on occassion:
THE SNP will win an overall majority and have an overwhelming mandate for indyref2 in 2021, according to an exclusive bombshell poll which puts the party on an incredible 53% of the constituency vote.
The Panelbase poll, commissioned by ScotGoesPop, also indicates that Nicola Sturgeon's party would gain 48% of the regional list ballot vote in next year's Holyrood elections.
Seat projections based on this would see the SNP gaining an additional nine seats, bringing the number of SNP MSPs to 72 — a thumping pro-independence majority even before you add in the projected five seats for the Scottish Greens.
This would dramatically increase pressure on Boris Johnson to grant a Section 30 order to hold indyref2.
Jackson Carlaw's Scottish Tories are projected to lose six seats, bringing their total down to 25, while Richard Leonard's Scottish Labour party is set to lose five seats, leaving them with 19 Holyrood politicians.
And it's looking set to be an even more turbulent time for the Conservatives down in Westminster, with the poll revealing that, as it stands, the party would lose every one of its six Scottish constituencies to the SNP, who would gain 10 seats to bring them to 58 in total. That would leave them short just one seat of sweeping Scotland — Labour's Ian Murray in Edinburgh South.
Scotland is rightly not amused with England right now.
Will there still be a Union in a few years time? I doubt it.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
And all because of the behaviour of the current version of the Conservative and UNIONIST Party!!
Time for a Trade Descriptions Act suit, IMO!
And this is before the shambles of Brexit. Interesting that Stormont voted for a Brexit extension, in similar vein. The consolation is that Boris may be able to hang on to Wales.
It’s not going to happen Richard.
An independent Scotland would have been in Queer Street without the financial backing of the UK Treasury. All the furloughs and business grants schemes would have been non-existent or extremely meagre on a smaller economic base. Even now the Finance Secretary has the begging bowl out to Westminster. And Brent Crude sank to $23/barrel in April and has stayed stubbornly below the average recovery cost of $40/barrel ever since, meaning that the oil revenue contribution will be negative this year, i.e. the oil companies will get rebates.
Also, in case it’s not been noticed south of the border, Sturgeon’s handling of the pandemic has been as bad, even worse in some respects than Johnson’s. It’s not as if we were not warned. Apart from Cygnus, a UK wide review, there were three reports specifically for the Scottish Government, that told of lack or equipment and processes to handle a pandemic, but it appears, just as at UK level, that the warnings were ignored, and the necessary preparations were never made. The first significant outbreak was at a Nike conference in Edinburgh, 25 cases, not properly tracked, but it was covered up by the First Minister. Had it been known to the public, pressure for an earlier lock down would have been likely. Instead concerts and sporting events were allowed to continue, including the Scotland-France rugby on the 8th March. The Old Firm game of 15th March was cancelled by the SPL, not the Scottish Government. BBC Scotland’s Disclosure programme calculated that a two week delay could have cost two thousand Scottish lives over the following month.
A good comparator of success or failure is New Zealand, with the same population as Scotland but with twenty-two deaths compared to our 2,500 (at least).
The lack of preparedness and delayed lock down affected the UK and the devolved administrations in equal measure, resulting in lack of PPE, hospital beds, ventilators and other necessary equipment. The urging of the WHO to “test, test, test” was ignored in Scotland as much as England, and current testing levels are lower in Scotland. Infections are at the same rate in Scotland. The death rate from the virus is the same. Excess deaths are the same. Deaths in care homes are slightly worse if anything. Discharging potentially infected people, and therefore the virus, from hospitals into care homes is the same. There is the same callousness in refusing to move the elderly sick from care homes to hospital. The result in all of the UK has been more infections and extra deaths. A good comparator of success or failure is New Zealand, with the same population as Scotland but with twenty-two deaths compared to our 2,500 (at least). It is difficult to see how such breathtaking levels of incompetence bolster any case for “independence” except with those obsessed with it in the first place.
And the questions on currency and economic strength that dogged the 2014 campaign have still not been addressed, let alone answered. And EU membership can’t happen until they are answered.
All of that’s before Alex Salmond starts serving writs on senior SNP personnel and senior civil servants and the chaos that will ensue.
Polls come and polls go but the Scottish people aren’t silly. They recognise a pig in a poke. They rejected it before and would do so again, if ever offered the option.
NZ does indeed prove how successful Scotland could be alone
You’re simply wrong Alex and it’s always proved boring to debate with you
The fat lady is warming up, so it’s time to face the music Alex. I’ve heard directly from 7 No voters turn to Yes in the past 10 days. These are people I could never had turned but thanks to the criminal Tories, and pathetic Labour we can see the finish of the Union. All we need now is for people to have a taste of a good hard Brexit to finish it off an Scotland will flourish.
I wish Alex you would just accept the inevitable outcome and stop trying to convince yourself with this nonsense, it’s beneath you.
Mr Gallagher,
Perhaps you have an argument; perhaps you don’t. Who knows? Nobody would find out by reading your comment. You proved precisely nothing, save that you have an opinion. Your opinion, unfortunately cannot be cashed as it stands. You need facts. Try using them.
Perhaps you have evidence; facts meticulously researched, precisely identified and accurately quantified: all the cash flows, all the trade, all the tax, all the investment, public and private; everything, in detail, robust and auditable, and unambiguously solely attributable to Scotland; no ifs, no buts, no maybes, no survey guesses.
I confess I will be surprised if you have them, because the best evidence presented that we seem to have; GERS, reveals only some parts of the Scottish economy that the British Government (the only institution in a position to collect all the facts – based on its sole prerogative), has actually collected. The British Government has not ever attempted to collect all the facts that fully encompass the Scottish economy, bar nothing (presumably because nobody in Westminster has any use for it, or wanted it, or wants now to invest in collecting it); what we have is an assembly of (not entirely rigorous) bits and pieces largely of government revenues and expenditure, but not the whole economic picture. Only the British Government has the access and resources to attempt to identify and collect this vast missing element of the economy. No government has ever wanted to know, or wanted the Scottish people to know. Please, prove me wrong. Lay it out. I will be delighted, and I don’t mind the result; whatever it shows. I have no axe to grind here. I prefer facts to fantasy. You will also acquire an immediate, and remarkable reputation for outstanding achievements in forensic economics, all on your own.
Just do it; don’t talk about, and then fail to do it: candidly, it is not a good look. Alternatively, if you don’t like the heat, may I recommend that you simply step out of the kitchen. Nobody will notice.
I still do not know whether your comment was really about the economy, or the pandemic; or just how awful a mess Scotland is in; just because it is Scotland. I suspect you have an axe to grind.
Your comment couldn’t be an apology for the Union, because you make quite a good case for the mess the UK has made of the management of the pandemic; so I can only guess that you are trying to persuade everyone to move to New Zealand. You certainly make a good case for terminating the Union; because the Scottish economy and the major strategic issues it is struggling with (like possessing a testing industry at all, or Government funding of public services at the Westminster level through the UK Budget allocation, or ten years of austerity that failed to tackle the pandemic as the major international security threat to the UK which had been identified, but was irresponsibly and wantonly ignored by Westminster) can all only be adequately tackled currently at UK level; and that is an unforgivable failure of the Union.
A lot of people not agreeing with me but it’s interesting that no-one tries to refute anything I wrote.
Because as has been pointed out AleX it as gibberish.
And for the record, I got this by email:
Your blog
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2020/06/08/scotland-is-not-amused/
I want to fill you in on information related to statements made by one commenter. This is the paragraph in question:
Alex Gallagher
Also, in case it’s not been noticed south of the border, Sturgeon’s handling of the pandemic has been as bad, even worse in some respects than Johnson’s. It’s not as if we were not warned. Apart from Cygnus, a UK wide review, there were three reports specifically for the Scottish Government, that told of lack or equipment and processes to handle a pandemic, but it appears, just as at UK level, that the warnings were ignored, and the necessary preparations were never made. The first significant outbreak was at a Nike conference in Edinburgh, 25 cases, not properly tracked, but it was covered up by the First Minister. Had it been known to the public, pressure for an earlier lock down would have been likely. Instead concerts and sporting events were allowed to continue, including the Scotland-France rugby on the 8th March. The Old Firm game of 15th March was cancelled by the SPL, not the Scottish Government. BBC Scotland’s Disclosure programme calculated that a two week delay could have cost two thousand Scottish lives over the following month.
Scotland never ran out of PPE, unlike in England. Private Care Homes did, but they are not the responsibility of ScotGov.
The best known outbreak is the one on Skye where the infection is thought to have come from an employee transferred up from Kent during lockdown by the owners HC-One. Within the last 2 or 3 weeks we have heard that there was an outbreak at a home in Peterhead, again private. Nearby Moray has only been showing infections since early to mid April which may or may not be connected with the construction workers that the Ministry of Defence sent up to work on Army property during lockdown — they were put up at Lossiemouth hotels. Note that construction is not allowed in Scotland under lockdown.
There is one other major outbreak area that I know of, and that is Greenock.. That may or may not be related to Peel Ports, who brought cruise ships in during early March and off-loaded crews at a time when the impact of presymptomatic and asymptomatic was not known. They currently have at least one cruise ship newly arrived in Glasgow. Greenock is still described as Coronavirus-stricken by the local newspaper.
Mr Gallagher is quite wrong to claim that the Nike Conference at Edinburgh was the first significant outbreak. It was NOT. The first confirmed case in Scotland was in Dundee/Tayside. The person who tested positive had returned from a ski trip in Italy in February. Dundee/Tayside is one of the harder hit areas and to this day features regularly on https://www.travellingtabby.com/scotland-coronavirus-tracker/ in At a glance under Regions for their high rate of infections and testing.
As regards the claim of “25 cases not properly tracked,” I presume Mr Gallagher, is complaining about the 3 groups the UKMSM found. The UKMSM claims that they should have been contacted and told.
Firstly there is a Kilt fitter who kitted out 10 “delegates” to the conference — which happens to be the number of the Scottish contingent — the fitting took place two days before the conference started. She claims that she and co-workers were ill with “flu-like symptoms” shortly afterwards.
Employees of Lloyds Bank shared common facilities in the hotel on the first day. The Lloyds office was closed about 2 ½ weeks later because of a single Covid-19 case. It may or may not be connected.
There was also a group of 3 tour guides who each took a group of about 20 for an hour long walking tour round Edinburgh old town on the second day of the conference. None of the guides became ill.
I must admit that the description of the attendees at the Nike conference as “delegates” amuses me. It imbues the event with an importance it does not deserve. I know of no commercial company event where the attendees have any voting functions. The kilt lady is not the only one to describe them in this way.
There were seventy attendees at the conference. Of those ten were Scottish. Of those ten, eight contracted Covid-19. The Scottish Government became aware via international notification when one of the attendees was tested on returning home “overseas”. It should be noted that Nike World Headquarters (Portland OR) announced a deep clean of their premises on the Sunday before ScotGov received the notification (on the Monday). The Nike European HQ (Hilversum) also announced a deep clean on that same Monday and admitted a Covid-19 case. Nike Corporate HQ in London announced deep clean a day or two later. None mentioned the conference.
I do not know where the 60 other attendees came from although I can identify several Nike premises in both Scotland and England that were deep-cleaned (in local Newspaper reports). The Newcastle outbreak has been traced to a Nike employee who was at the conference — the local Nike Corporate Offices, Doxford Park were among those premises were deep cleaned. However, the tracing of that particular individual and their contacts was the responsibility of the English authorities as would be all other attendees from England.
I do not know if the Alex Gallagher of the comment is Alex Gallagher the Labour Councillor, who is North Ayrshire Council’s Cabinet Member for Economy, but it would not surprise me. Both he and Ian Murray the sole Labour MP in Scotland are making the same claims about the “cover-up” by the FM. They both display the same lamentable ignorance of the data protection laws about patient confidentiality. To my mind that simply proves their unfitness for public office. Having the matter splashed across the front pages of the tabloids could lead to identification of individuals who might then spend their period of self isolation with a press pack encamped at the end of their driveway. I cannot for the life of me see how that would encourage any of the Nike staff to cooperate fully with the tracers. I suspect it would also render ScotGov open to legal action.
Of course, Westminster holds the purse strings and ScotGov could not have acted earlier without jeopardizing funding from WM. The UKMSM Labour Lib-Dem and above all Conservatives choose not to recognise this reality.
I also think that the makers of the Disclosure program should be held responsible for misinforming the public as to the laws which regulate the activities of their government.
Mr Gallagher,
“A lot of people not agreeing with me but it’s interesting that no-one tries to refute anything I wrote.”
Perhaps you have already forgotten that you made claims about the Scottish economy at the beginning of your comment. This was what I chose to examine; or rather waste my time reading bald guff. Allow me to remind you; the claims you made were bereft of evidence. “Queer street” is not evidence. The only fact to which you refer is the price of a barrel of oil. I hate to be the one to break the news; but that is not an adequate description of the Scottish economy. There is nothing to refute on the economy in your comment, because you failed even to reach the starting gate.
On the pandemic you managed only to remind us that New Zealand is better run than Britain; but of course New Zealand had the wisdom to flee the reach of Westminster long, long ago. Your defence of the Union is best described as risible; and Richard’s rebuttal has thoroughly deconstructed your lame whinge about Scotland.
Mr Gallagher you may be best advised to retire from politics, because frankly you appear completely incapable of holding an opinion up to scrutiny, that is even worth examining. You are sir, a time waster; and I have now wasted my valuable time on your paucity of rational comment, twice.
Thanks for your response Richard.
Here’s my response to your response.
Richard: “Also, in case it’s not been noticed south of the border, Sturgeon’s handling of the pandemic has been as bad, even worse in some respects than Johnson’s. It’s not as if we were not warned. Apart from Cygnus, a UK wide review, there were three reports specifically for the Scottish Government, that told of lack or equipment and processes to handle a pandemic, but it appears, just as at UK level, that the warnings were ignored, and the necessary preparations were never made. The first significant outbreak was at a Nike conference in Edinburgh, 25 cases, not properly tracked, but it was covered up by the First Minister. Had it been known to the public, pressure for an earlier lock down would have been likely. Instead concerts and sporting events were allowed to continue, including the Scotland-France rugby on the 8th March. The Old Firm game of 15th March was cancelled by the SPL, not the Scottish Government. BBC Scotland’s Disclosure programme calculated that a two week delay could have cost two thousand Scottish lives over the following month.”
Richard states
“Scotland never ran out of PPE, unlike in England. Private Care Homes did, but they are not the responsibility of ScotGov.”
The health of everyone, particularly in a crisis/pandemic, is the responsibility of the government. They are responsible for planning and preparing for a pandemic which, let’s not forhet, was the No1 threat according to our planning criteria. As I said “apart from Cygnus, a UK wide review, there were three reports specifically for the Scottish Government, that told of lack or equipment and processes to handle a pandemic, but it appears, just as at UK level, that the warnings were ignored, and the necessary preparations were never made.
Let’s break the statement down;
“Scotland never ran out of PPE, unlike in England”.
Try this: “Half of all nurses asked to reuse PPE” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-52516136
or this: https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scots-nurses-face-appalling-choice-21817645
“Private Care Homes did, but they are not the responsibility of ScotGov.”
Many care homes in the UK are private but they, obviously, must be part of any strategy to control pandemics. Government controls strategy. In England that’s the Tories In Scotland that’s the SNP. Both messed it up.
RM. “Mr Gallagher is quite wrong to claim that the Nike Conference at Edinburgh was the first significant outbreak. It was NOT. The first confirmed case in Scotland was in Dundee/Tayside.”
Twenty five infections in Edinburgh was the first big, i.e. significant, group infection known about in the UK. But the really important thing is that it was not made public. If it had, pressure for an earlier lock down would have increased, not just in Scotland but across the whole country. And lives may have been saved.
RM “Of course, Westminster holds the purse strings and ScotGov could not have acted earlier without jeopardizing funding from WM. The UKMSM Labour Lib-Dem and above all Conservatives choose not to recognise this reality.”
Two things.
1. A significant infection in Edinburgh, spreading to Newcastle, would be a trigger for all UK, not just Scotland There is no record of the FM asking for an earlier lock down in Scotland or the UK.
2. The Scottish NHS is fully devolved. The FM has stated on numerous occasions, notably in an interview with Krishnan Guru Murty on CH4, that she takes the decisions in Scotland and for Scotland. There is no record of her asking for an earlier lock down in Scotland only.
Richard says: I also think that the makers of the Disclosure program should be held responsible for misinforming the public as to the laws which regulate the activities of their government.”
You can bet your sporran that if the SNP thought there was a chance of this, the Scottish Government would be all over it like a rash. They aren’t because there isn’t. And it is the media’s job to inform us what happened. Particularly if the Government is keeping it from us.
If we had acted earlier, thousands of lives could have been saved. That goes for the whole UK. The relevant authority in Scotland is the SNP Scottish Government and they are at least as culpable as the Tories at Westminster.
And, from …
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/statistics-shame-scottish-government-handling-covid-brian-monteith-2877181
this…
“Here are the horrifying facts:
Northern Ireland, 235 deaths per 1m people and 1.47 deaths/1m per lived density;
Wales 365 deaths per 1m people and 1.79 deaths/1m per lived density;
England 499 deaths per 1m people and 0.94 deaths/1m per lived density;
and Scotland 580 deaths per 1m people and 2.9 deaths/1m per lived density.”
RM “There is one other major outbreak area that I know of, and that is Greenock.. That may or may not be related to Peel Ports, who brought cruise ships in during early March and off-loaded crews at a time when the impact of presymptomatic and asymptomatic was not known. They currently have at least one cruise ship newly arrived in Glasgow. Greenock is still described as Coronavirus-stricken by the local newspaper.
Not sure what point you are making here Richard, but note the cruise ships were brought in “early March”. The Nike outbreak was 26-27 February, so prompt action could have stopped this. My case precisely. But the outbreak was kept secret until revealed by the BBC.
As I made clear, I thought, that was not my response
It was mailed to me
I repeat, I do not think you are worth engaging with Alex
Mr Gallagher,
You have yet to say anything about your inadequate remarks on the Scottish economy.
On the private care homes, it is worth pointing out that the suppliers to private care homes were instructed to direct all their supplies to Public Health England, and not to supply care homes outside England. Source: ITV, 15th April, “PPE supplier confirms England only policy for care homes”. This obviously created a huge supply problem in private care, but the real underlying problem here was the critical scale of PPE shortages in England. Why? Austerity over ten years had destroyed the key stockpile of national emergency PPE built up to a peak in 2009. The Guardian, 12th April: “Analysis of official financial data suggests £325m was wiped off the value of the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) emergency stockpile, reducing it from £831m in 2013 under the Conservative-led coalition government to £506m by March last year.”
These stocks then had to be retested before distribution, with concomitant delays; and when they arrived staff found layers of out-of-date stickers on the supplies, just to inspire confidence. Here is the Guardian again: “The widespread shortages of equipment, which Hancock has blamed on problems with the distribution system, has raised questions about the UK’s levels of preparedness for a pandemic of this kind. Accounts suggest funding for ‘stockpiled goods’ that are ‘held for use in national emergencies’ was increased between 2008 and 2011, when pandemic preparedness was identified as a national priority for the NHS. But since 2013 the value of the stockpile has fallen. The findings are likely to renew questions about whether government stockpiles held sufficient quantities of personal protective equipment (PPE) before the Covid-19 pandemic and whether emergency preparations were affected by almost a decade of cuts and reduced public investment.” In addition gloabalisation exposed a national, strategic over dependence on a supply chain determined by ‘just-in-time’ principles; there were no longer routine stockpiles of equipment held.
This was a UK national emergency. Planning for UK emergencies is a fundamental security of the state responsibility of the UK: the Union. Your precious Union. It failed. Catastrophically at the strategic level through ten years of austerity, incompetence on the grand scale, and routine Government bungling.
Now I have covered PPE and the private sector problem. I leave it to others to dismantle the rest of your slapdash analysis. I have already wasted time, three times – on a time-waster.
In his post at 1:28 today Alex Gallagher stated: “Here are the horrifying facts: Northern Ireland, 235 deaths per 1m people and 1.47 deaths/1m per lived density; Wales 365 deaths per 1m people and 1.79 deaths/1m per lived density; England 499 deaths per 1m people and 0.94 deaths/1m per lived density; and Scotland 580 deaths per 1m people and 2.9 deaths/1m per lived density.”
This just goes to support the old adage of “don’t believe what you read just because it’s printed in a newspaper.”
I’ve looked at the Scotsman article which gives no precise source info and merely states that it comes from “a revealing table of comparative statistics released following the COBRA meetings”. I googled ‘COBRA Covid19 Statistics’ which gave no statistical data but does provide a link to ONS data which paints a very different picture. As at today (9 June) the ONS figures, which reflect the Registers of Scotland data, were:
England — Population 55,977,200; Covid19 Deaths 36521; Deaths/million 652
Scotland — Population 5,463,200; Covid19 Deaths 2415; Deaths/million 442
Wales — Population 3,138,600; Covid19 Deaths 1410; Deaths/million 449
N Ireland — Population 1,881,600; Covid 19 Deaths 537; Deaths/million 285
I suggest that population density is largely irrelevant — you might as well records deaths/sq mile — and the largest number of deaths will generally be in the areas of greatest population density.
I thought that was nonsense
Glad you checked
Thank you Mr Mathieson,
You have covered Mr Gallagher’s hapless use of statistics in the pandemic, I have covered his failure to understand the British Government’s overarching role in national responses to major crises, and his confusion over private care; Dr Rideout dismissed his economics (okay, that was largely a vacuum) and Richard, or his source some aspects of the Nike episode. The problem is, five or six of us all wasted our time to answer someone whose idea of writing is, “you can bet your sporran”. Well, you can bet your sporran that Mr Gallagher not only can’t do research, he can’t do writing either.
Alex Gallagher has not come back
Same old unionist tosh from Alex. The hot air won’t work next time because the facts are becoming widely known –
https://www.uktradeinfo.com/Statistics/RTS/Pages/default.aspx
“An independent Scotland would have been in Queer Street without the financial backing of the UK Treasury. All the furloughs and business grants schemes would have been non-existent or extremely meagre on a smaller economic base. Even now the Finance Secretary has the begging bowl out to Westminster. And Brent Crude sank to $23/barrel in April and has stayed stubbornly below the average recovery cost of $40/barrel ever since, meaning that the oil revenue contribution will be negative this year, i.e. the oil companies will get rebates. ”
This is simply garbage. Scotland, like any other country with its own currency, would be in exactly the same place where it has unlimited funds available from the Scottish Reserve Bank at 0% interest any time it needs them. In fact we could have followed Prof Murphy from the outset (with I think his plan from 11 March) and been more generous and better organised in protecting business and the self-employed. The economic base has little to do with it, and in any case looking at Scotland per capita compared to rUK then Scotland has far more resources per person, and is far bigger exporter too. The current best estimates suggest Scotland has imports = exports meaning we pay our way in the World and have no need of any external finance. That is not true of the UK which has the biggest deficit on trade ever, and without Scottish exports the rUK would be even worse. From the ONS Pink Book the UK in 2016 had net assets of zero for the first time since the 17th century, so that is all the holiday homes, foreign companies we have shares in, secret stashes in Cayman, etc all cancelled out by what we owe foreigners. In the early 1980s the UK was one of the biggest holders of net assets in the World, so all that frittered away in the 40 years since.
The SNP following the 2019 April Conference also now has a clear policy on currency which is ‘that the Scottish Parliament should authorise the preparation of a Scottish currency as soon as practicable after a vote for independence with the aim that the currency be ready for introduction as soon as practicable after Independence Day’. There are one or two in the leadership who have yet to accept the decision of Conference, but there are 120,000 members of the party who are very clear what they want. ‘as soon as’ means a month or two.
I am also pleased today to welcome John McNally MP as the first MP to have formally joined the Scottish Currency Group (see on Facebook or visit http://www.reservebank.scot or the Reserve Bank page on Facebook). I hope there will be a few of his colleagues in the next weeks.
What an extraordinary irony, that if Alex Gallagher here is indeed the Alex Gallagher he is suspected of being, he is relying upon the opinion of a leading Scottish Tory and Brexiteer, Brian Monteith! Or should that be ex-Tory – they may be too wet for him now?
And Monteith’s article, with its reliance on statistics, puts me in mind of the statistics you often see at the end of a football match, where one team has dominated the game but still lost. The only stat that matters there is the score. And the simple comparison is that Covid-19 deaths in Scotland have been proportionately less than in England. That’s the stat that matters here. And whilst I am sure the Scottish Government has made mistakes, which Nicola Sturgeon has acknowledged, they are probably honest mistakes, unlike those made by the Muppets in Westminster.
“Even now the Finance Secretary has the begging bowl out to Westminster.”
Because as part of this defunct union the devolved Scottish government has no choice. But that’s where Westminster likes it to be….with the begging bowl out so it can pretend to be delivering largesse.
An Independent Scotland with its own currency would cease to be reliant on charitable donations of its own wealth being begrudgingly given (lent) back.
I don’t think you have a case, Alex.
Spot on Andy
Alex “Braveheart” Gallagher telling lies on behalf of his imperial masters again.
Scotland is the richest country in Europe. More oil than Norway and larger Tourism, Finance, Renewables, Drinks, Games sectors.
Why would an Orange Order member and all round bigot who voted to tear down the Saltire possible be opposed to his constituents being released from poverty? He puts love of a flag and a party over peoples lives. There’s names for people like him.
Some more evidence.
https://twitter.com/blairmcdougall/status/1270837534738825216
It’s hardly a compelling response to your critics Alex
The UK Treasury paying the wages of 30% of the Scottish workforce. As I said, an “independent” Scotland would be in Queer St without the strength of the UK economy to fall back on. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/11/uks-virus-bailout-schemes-save-750000-scottish-jobs/
The UK government would, like many other countries, not have needed to do any such thing is not governed by London
But equally, it could with its own currency done exactly the same thing
You’ve got the wrong man Mr Penguin. Quite possibly the wrong Universe.
Re Alex Gallagher’s post at 3:09, the Twitter feed he links to, seeks to pin the blame for the death toll in Scotland on the First Minister for not locking down sooner, but in doing so entirely ignores two critical factors which limited her ability to act.
In relation to UK’s initial strategy and late announcement of lockdown, the devolved governments were barred from taking active part in the initial crucial SAGE meetings. They could submit a written statement/questions and send a delegate/observer, but these delegates were forbidden to speak at the meetings and so the devolved nations were effectively shut out of the crucial processes.
It was a classic example of the devolved “children” being seen and not heard, while the English “grown-ups” did all the talking and decision making. The result was that the devolved nations’ own strategies had to be in lockstep with England’s until it became obvious that England was on a dangerously wrong track. I’ve got no doubt an independent Scottish Gov would have agreed a sensible strategy with the scientists at an earlier date, got its defences primed and suffered fewer deaths as a result. Instead we got another costly “Benefit of the Union”.
However, as well as the UK Gov’s sidelining of devolved nations’ input to the early SAGE meeting, there’s also the matter of legality: Fiscal, Economic and Monetary Policy is reserved to Westminster, as are all Emergency Powers, so Scotland didn’t have the legal powers to enact the shutdown until Westminster gave its assent to a transfer of powers on 25th Mar, two days after lockdown had been announced. Put these factors together and the Scottish Gov’s early, if grudging, adherence to the UK Gov’s impractical policy of a UK-wide single policy is understandable. The tipping point, I think, was when the scientists pointed out the catastrophic casualties likely to result from the UK Gov’s Herd Immunity strategy. At that point, the devolved governments appear to have agreed to insist on their own strategies and timetables.
I suspect Nicola Sturgeon isn’t mentioning any of this at this stage (even when it might be a useful get-out to awkward questioning) in order to keep her powder dry for the inevitable Judicial Review/ Public Enquiry which will follow once we’re safely out of the virus threat. Personally, I think she should ram this down the throats of the questioners who demand to know why she didn’t lock-down earlier, if only to shut them up and protect her own position.
In response to Alex Gallagher’s post at 4:52 pm re the UK Gov’s funding of 30% of Scotland’s workforce, there are reports that this money has still to be paid to the employers and is being deliberately withheld as a tactic to force the Scottish Gov into an earlier withdrawal from lockdown than it plans. Obviously this would be interference in matters which have been legally transferred pro tem to the Scottish Gov and, equally obviously, it carries the risk of kickstarting a second wave of Covid19, which the Scottish Gov is determined to prevent. That grinding noise you can hear is the sound of constitutional tectonic plates shifting.
Ken 10.01
Highly implausible that Sturgeon would take such treatment without complaint, or worry about the legal advice. As we all know, that’s not her style. And if she thought complaining would achieve something, either better covid response or brownie-points from her followers your ears would be assaulted. And remember, Sturgeom missed as many COBRA meetings as Johnson, so she doesn’t seem to have been particularly focused on covid. Maybe other events in March took her attention.
As for “an independent Scottish Gov would have agreed a sensible strategy with the scientists at an earlier date”, the cover up of the Nike outbreak gives the lie to that.
Ken 1012
Rumours of furlough money being withheld in the early days never shown to be true? Do you have proof?
“Scotland is not amused”….. and nor am I!
I fear Scottish independence for what it might do to the electoral calculus of England.
Since 1918 only four elections would have been affected if Scottish MP’s had been taken out of the equation.
https://fullfact.org/scotland/claims-permanent-conservative-rule-after-scottish-independence-dont-stand-history/
Alex G really is talking through his arse. If Sunak terminates the furlough scheme and other income support measures before Scotland decides it is safe for folk to return to work the UK government will effectively be forcing people back to work when it is unsafe to do so. That will provoke an almighty constitutional crisis and will demonstrate once and for all that Scotland needs independence with our own currency and our own central bank. Even the conservatively minded SNP leadership would have to concede that their Growth Commission recommendations will have to be consigned to the bin.
I agree with everything you say Richard but with reservations. Nicola Sturgeon is relatively young and has made far too many basic errors and I am an Independence Supporter (albeit with caveats). She does tend to pamper to her adoring legion of young devotees. She caved in to demands by teachers for 9% increase. Similarly the equal pay for female public service staff in Glasgow that was resisted by Labour for many years (chiefly because they resented making the lawyer behind the action a massive amount in commission) and virtually bankrupted Glasgow City Council. She also appears to have a cunningly disguised ruthless streak proved by repeated displays of disloyalty. Add in the Machiavellian type control freakery of her husband – note a rather bare Wikipedia page – and finally sneaking in a 12% wage increase for civil servants and Government officials are pushing me very near to the edge. If I wasn’t too old I think I’d emigrate to New Zealand
Mr Fayre,
For the avoidance of doubt, are you actually presenting the proposition that the Labour Council in Glasgow should have resisted the paying the compensation for failing to provide equal pay to women employees, because of a dispute over commission fees to their lawyer? Really?
There were 16,000 equal pay claimants, £548m outstanding, and the claims covered thirteen years back to 2006, as I understand it. I claim no knowledge on this matter. The fees were due to their lawyers, and the arrangements involved the claimants unions. It seems to me, prima facie, this is a matter between the claimants, the unions and the lawyers. I do not understand why:
1. The payments should be withheld by the Council because of an issue between the claimants and their lawyers
2. If the Unions cannot handle and resolve issues like this; precisely what are they for?
I genuinely do not understand. For example, because of the cost to the Council of the settlement it seems you believe the Council should simply not have paid it, even if they had the obligation. Or are you saying the Council should have interfered in the relationship of the claimants with their lawyers? You will understand that both of these propositions, if you are promoting them do seem, prima facie very odd. Please explain.
Hi John,
Hope it’s OK to call you John.
I went with the old adage
‘When you can dismiss all alternatives, the one you are left with, no matter how preposterous it may seem, is the likely answer’
Looking into this it would appear that it was one lawyer, as opposed to lawyers, who championed the cause of the women and had been fighting their case for years. The Labour controlled council and the GMB union dug their heels in and refused to settle.
Why?
Your figure and it seems accurate quotes £548 million.
I believe the case was taken on a ‘No win No fee’ basis.
The standard ‘cut’ is between 10 and 30%.
So between £55 and £162 million in fees to one man
Nearly as bad as the insolvency/bankruptcy organisations.
Mr Fayre,
Thank for your response, and the information; useful but not really very enlightening, or germane to the thrust of your original comment. Unfortunately you will require to deconstruct your detailed workings that led you to the only alternative left; I am but a very simple chap, and quite precisely I am still at a loss to know on what grounds you believe the City Council should have refused to settle their clear and quantified obligation; and what business it was of the Council, what arrangements the calimants made for their legal advice, or what grounds you believe theCouncil were entitled or obliged to interfere?
Simple.
For the further avoidance of doubt, and solely to help you direct your attention where needful: the kernel of your point was the FM’s many “basic errors”, including caving in too teachers; which is then directly linked (a little sweepingly if I may say) to the Glasgow City Council’s failings. Here is what you made of that link: “the equal pay for female public service staff in Glasgow that was resisted by Labour for many years (chiefly because they resented making the lawyer behind the action a massive amount in commission) and virtually bankrupted Glasgow City Council. ”
I am still trying to understand how you arrived at your conclusion, and how you justify it. Thank you in anticipation of your reply, and please feel free to call me by whatever name you will.
I was going to start with a quote from Mark Twain re ‘ Patriotism means supporting your country always and your government only when it deserves it” but a certain Mr Trump beat me to it, when he was less unhinged so I wont bother.
First of all I didn’t deliberately link any of my reasons for my belief. I simply outlined examples of what I considered poor leadership.
1. The Glasgow City Council ‘equal pay scandal’. First of all I must state that the actions of Richard Leonard and the GMB union in attacking the Scot Gov and pressuring them into settling in full were mind blowing hypocrisy of the highest order.
Since 2006 the Labour controlled council, aided and abetted by the unions in general and Leonard’s GMB in particular, were abysmal in their handling of the crisis. Where they failed, however, one lawyer succeeded by forcing Nicola Sturgeon into settling the case in full or rather instructing the now SNP Glasgow City Council to settle.
Why? I have every sympathy with the women concerned but they were pawns in a game constructed by the abysmal failure of a Labour controlled council, the unions and one lawyer. If NS had any bottle at all she should be suing Scottish Labour and the GMB for the £548 million that virtually bankrupted the council and forced further cuts on her own constituents.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-49985113
2. The teacher’s pay demands.
I lost count of the number of times teachers quoted “race to the bottom” at me with no idea of what it actually meant. To accede to the demands for a 9% pay rise at a time when all other public service workers, nurses, care workers, police etc etc were being forced to submit to a cost of living rise was naive in the extreme.
(As evidenced by the almost immediate demands from university lecturers for similar increases)
3. The very recent 12% pay rise to civil servants is, to my mind, simply obscene bearing in mind the above mentioned constraints to other professions.
I could add several other examples but let’s just leave it that NS, to me is pandering to her fresh faced university educated sycophants who form the core element of her advisory group to the detriment of all others. That added to the lack of loyalty shown could come back to bite her if she doesn’t listen.
I think you’re moving very close to a) irrelevance and b) abuse
Frankly, you’re another today whose tone is deeply unappealing
Why not make your point without the abuse?
Mr Fayre,
“First of all I didn’t deliberately link any of my reasons for my belief. I simply outlined examples of what I considered poor leadership.”
What an extraordinary, question begging, irrelevant non-sequitur. You still haven’t answered the questions I fairly and legitimately asked. You have simply delivered two pointless rants that has nothing to do with either the legitimacy of Glasgow District Council’s payment or the claimants’ legal fees; the core of your first comment, and the only matter I was foolish enough to consider worth reflecting on. There was, however clearly no point at all to your original comment.
This is the second time today I have wasted my time reading, and commenting on what I have only slowly realised was pointless guff by a commenter on Richard’s Blog; a record, and a lesson learned.
Sorry – but as you will have noted, I was not amused either
Actually, Richard we are lucky and should be more grateful. Perhaps I am suffering from lockdown fatigue, for I seem to be becoming irascible (or is that just more irascible?). In any case, there are relatively few time-wasters who venture on to your site without a constructive thought in their head, and few trolls; no doubt through your hard work, and for which we should thank you. For the most part it is possible to have a calm debate or discussion, and actually learn something fresh.
Now you know why I moderate the comments
12% you say?
https://www.civilserviceworld.com/articles/news/scottish-government-staff-set-3-%E2%80%98interim%E2%80%99-pay-rise
The people of Scotland have been consistently misled or lied to by those that are desperate to keep their own little union, what’s left of empire, together. I remember well during the last independence vote Scotland being told by those against that they would be forced out of the EU and that this would be very damaging for them. A few years later with the Brexit vote in the bag many of those same people are now in the everything is fine boat about leaving the EU as long as everything is controlled by little England. As always, such people like to have their cake and eat it.
Scotland becoming independent would present a problem for Labour though. How exactly do they convince England to vote for them when the Tories have turned themselves into an English Nationalist Party and seem to have things sown up? FPTP has effectively turned the UK into a one party English state.
The SNP has stolen Labour’s clothes in Scotland. I doubt whether Labour ever wins a majority of seats there again and the Tories don’t need to. Labour will have to win England and the last time they did that with a radical agenda was arguably under Atlee post WW2. I discount the Blair/Wilson/Callaghan Governments as they were hardly radical, more keeping the seat of Government warm until the Tories won again, usually with a more right wing distinctly English nationalistic agenda. The two party, now one party system has a lot to answer for. Democracy in the UK is a sham and I fear that once Scotland leaves it will be game over unless Labour wakes up, smells the coffee and adopts PR.
Labour is worth off with Scotland in the Union
It returns Tory MPs but nit Labour ones
True, in recent elections there have been a few more Tory MP’s returned with Labour lagging behind them, the SNP dominating both. Go back to 2005 and 2010, Lab got 41 seats both times. 1997 and 2001, 56 seats both times. From the early 1960’s to 2010 Labour dominated every general election in Scotland. In 2015, the SNP thrashed them 56 to 1. Historically Scotland was safe ground for Labour as much as rural England is a Tory heartland. This is my point, Lab has lost Scotland to the SNP, the Tories simply don’t need it anyway. Labour does need it given Tory dominance in England.
I still wonder how does Labour win England? Even if they don’t and Scotland stays part of the UK, how do they win back Scotland?
I think they will never win back Scotland
The chance has gone
Killed by their arrogant assumption that it was always theirs
Not since 1955 has Scotland voted Tory, and until recent elections, that meant Scotland voted Labour. In that time, the UK has only had Labour government because England voted for it – and never once needed Scottish MPs to have a majority.
We’re coming to the point where Labour offers only lockstep with rUK and tortured arguments for restricting Scotland’s choices, Unionist ground already occupied by the Conservatives in Scotland.
Has the SNP stolen Labour’s clothes? I’m not entirely sure. The last New Labour governments were hardly the Labour of Scottish expectations. These days, if Labour has a concern with workers/labour, it’s as some kind of solidarity across the UK against competition from international workers/labour. British nationalist Labour is a far less attractive prospect than an SNP that is internationalist and co-operative. Clothes: Labour changed traditional red for jingoistic red white and blue; I’m less convinced the SNP changed at all – whatever palette they are.
When Scotland is independent there will be a need for a genuine left of centre party
Right now that is not the SNP
There are two basic rules to Scottish politics. The first is that Labour and the SNP have an enormous mutual hatred. The second is that they both hate the Tories, but probably not as much as they hate each other. The equilibrium of these two equations has been disturbed in recent years with the demise of Labour, and the rise of the Tories [the latter showing that there is a deeply conservative streak to Scotland].
The Scottish political scene is in many ways reminiscent of the way Scottish pre-grouping railway companies used to act relative to each other.
Richard, your point is goes right to the heart of what I don’t understand about Alex Gallagher’s fervent Unionist stance. If he wants Labour in Scotland to have a meaningful active role in politics, it will have a better chance of achieving that in an independent Scotland than Labour has of gaining power in the UK in the next decade (unless Boris and his Travelling Circus of a government implode). Once Scottish independence is achieved, elections here will look very different from those of the last decade.
I’m looking forward to having a meaningful vote in a democracy where we can vote out incompetent governments. Compare and contrast that with the ludicrous pantomime regularly played out at Westminster, where English MPs can vote on Scottish matters of which they know little, but not vice versa, and the Scottish Affairs Committee (SAC), which is Ruritania personified. The Conservatives got 25.1% of the 2019 popular vote and 10% of the Scottish seats yet hold 5 of the 11 SAC places, 2 of which are filled by English constituency MPs. Labour got 18.6% of the popular vote but only 2% of the Scottish seats and have 2 SAC places, both filled by English constituency MPs. Lib Dems got 9.5% of the popular vote, 7% of the seats and 1 SAC place. SNP had 45% of the popular vote but that translated into 81% of the Westminster seats, yet only 3 SAC places. Nothing illustrates better the illogicality of Westminster’s FPTP system and the undemocratic and unrepresentative structures of its committees which conduct so much of Parliament’s important business.
Thanks Ken
Further to my post at 9:23pm on 9th June, I omitted to point out the absurdity of Labour’s places on the Scottish Affairs Committee: in the 2019 GE Labour won 2% of Scottish seats at Westminster, but this equates to a single Scottish Labour MP. In other words Labour has twice as many seats on the SAC than it has in Parliament. However it appointed two English MPs to the SAC places, which says a lot about how the Labour Party feels about its Scottish Accounting Unit (for that is what the Labour operation in Scotland is called) and its sole Scottish MP.
Apologies Richard.
I have just re-read my post and you are quite right.
Lesson learned hopefully.
Memo to self. Don’t post immediately after receiving yet another piece of ‘Sun Life
Junk Mail’
You’re good at abuse, aren’t you?
Apology not accepted because it is apparent you do not mean it
First of all a sincere and heartfelt apology to you and Mr. Warren.
I could make excuses and blame lockdown fever, shielding whatever but that would be making excuses
The thing is I’m not angry at teachers or unions or university lecturers or university graduates or any one group in particular.
I’m angry, no I’m sad at what I consider to be a distillation of Scottish values. The ‘you’ve got to look after number one’ attitude that is apparent nowadays.
I’m genuinely sad at the ‘diving to win a penalty’ mentality that has wormed it’s way into society.
We’re better than that. We always have been. It’s still there though. We still lead the world in some things.
https://www.tartanarmychildrenscharity.org.uk/main/overseas.html
https_www.tasunshineappeal.scot/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tasunshine
That’s it no more digging
Mr Fayre,
I wish to accept your apology, because I think it takes more courage to apologise (twice!) than to become more righteous (the easy escape); or on social media, just to scarper. Thank you.
I confess I do not understand the fol-de-rols with which you embellished your apology (because I made that mistake last time, and look where I ended); so I am not going there. But apology accepted.
This a straight steal of a twitter thread by @johnferry18, so hat tip John
I see some on this thread are saying Scotland would just be borrowing and furloughing workers like any other country right now if we had gone indy. Let me explain why that doesn’t stand to reason. If Scotland had become fiscally and monetarily independent in March 2016, as would have happened following a ‘Yes’ vote, this would simply not be possible.
First, no one is saying a country of 5 million people with an advanced economy can’t issue debt, have a central bank controlling its money supply etc. The argument is one of transition – going from being an integrated part of a single monetary & fiscal entity, the UK, and then unilaterally removing your economy from those functions & trying to transition to operating on a stand-alone basis with a new currency regime & credible fiscal systems in place.
Let’s be clear how momentous & challenging that would be. It’s never been attempted in the modern era & in the context of open, free market economies, with all the interconnectedness & complexity that entails – from mass consumer debt markets, to insurance & pensions markets, to state-established welfare etc. The closest examples we have are the break up of communist states with underdeveloped economies & practically no private sector, or colonies becoming independent in the post-War years, prior to modern financial complexity & where the economies were already mostly segregated anyway from the colonial power.
So Scotland removing itself from the UK, which would entail full monetary & fiscal autonomy kicking in overnight upon secession/independence day, would be an exceptional economic experiment. What would the likely result of that experiment have been? We have a good idea of what would have happened after March 2016’s indy day. We know for a fact that the new state would have started with a budget deficit of at least £13.3 billion, or 8.3% of GDP for 2016/17, as per government figures. (Could anyone disputing this figure pls tell me what the deficit would be, why they believe it and quote a respectable economic source. Thanks).
We also know that a monetary regime called ‘sterlingisation’ – unofficially using the pound with the Bank of England no longer controlling the money supply or ensuring liquidity within the Scottish economy — wasSNP policy and would have kicked in upon secession day. Take this one aspect alone. One of Scotland’s leading macroeonomists, Prof McDonald at Glasgow Uni, looked at this after it became official SNP policy & concluded that, given Scotland’s balance of payments deficit (different to the budget deficit & to do with net cross border transactions), an indy Scotland would quickly be subject to a “classic currency crisis” with cash in the economy drying up, & the new state most likely being forced to launch a new currency under emergency conditions. A crisis like this would be unprecedented in a modern economy.
It’s the sort of crisis we might have seen in South American or Asian emerging markets in the past but not in an advanced economy, and its implications for wealth in the country, for people’s savings and livelihoods, would have been immense. On the build up to the crisis well off people & businesses would have acted rationally to protect their interests by moving capital, companies, & perhaps themselves & their families, outside the country (further eroding the tax base). The combination of the cash crisis & large budget deficit position means it would almost certainly not have been possible for the new Scottish government to issue sovereign debt at an affordable price.
March 24, 2016 fiscal & monetary autonomy therefore would have led to both an emerging market-style currency crisis and a public sector payments crisis as the new state would have found it impossible, at this critical stage, to meet its liabilities either through taxation or borrowing (on the ground that could have meant public sector workers not getting paid for some period, bills delivered to the NHS & other public sector bodies going unpaid, resulting in services being withdrawn etc). Now, imagine a country having to go through an exceptional crisis like that in 2016/17 & then being hit by coronavirus in 2020.
It doesn’t bear thinking about. And that’s why an indy Scotland would not have been in a position to bail out its economy in the way the UK has this year. We’d still be reeling from the 2016/17 self-inflicted economic crisis brought on by indy.
Stable states with established government debt markets can pay for things like a furlough scheme, but the evidence is compelling that Scotland would still have been some years away from completing its transition to becoming a stable stand-alone state.
The logical thing would be for rational peeople to stop voting for nationalists who almost ruined our country once & are pushing to do so again. Hat tip: John Ferry
Alex
This is total nonsense
Time and again this has happened without difficulty
And markets look to fundamentals and not to your political paranoia
Politely, you’re talking complete shite and no one believes you
Richard
Can you point out where? You know a reasoned response. Or anyone else?
Just read all Tim Rideout has written
See the evidence of so many new and small states
None have done what you prescribe for Scotland
But why let evidence trouble you Alex? It never has before