We gained independence from Danmörk for the reason the treaty was not renewed in 1940 and because nothing happened for three years we became separate. The treaty started in 1918 to give some rule to ReykjavÃk. The fishing problem came later when certain nations ignored our limits, so we extended them to protect our industries. Scotland could do this but will have a problem as they are not an island nation. I wa slooking at this problem and want to know what the Barnett Formula is? I have an idea that the formula divides tax money and spends it in a way that means Scotland recieves more for each person than in England or Wales, but not from Northern Ãrland.
That's just about spot on AK - it's for public expenditure costs and the share for each is based on its population as a percentage of the total UK population, but beyond that I'm a bit hazy. I know that it has been a bone of contention for those who receive less per capita - understandable I suppose, but that ignores two things, namely the old adage that two can live as cheaply as one and that one member (Scotland) consistently gets far less given than it puts in....
The Barnett Formula was devised over 30 years ago as a short term measure, but still exists today. It provides public money to each part of the UK. The last figures I can find show that if you take the Index of per capita public expenditure as being 100, then you get the following. England 96 Wales 112 Scotland 122 N.Ireland 127 Currently Scotland receives more than 50% of it's total spend from this source. Lord Barnett who devised the formula has said it no longer works because Scotland has a decreasing proportion of the UK population, yet keeps getting far more than is fair. There have been a number of committees looking at it, but they concluded it could take years to change without Scotland having a massive drop. This could come about in one quick blow though of course.
Bit of a stretch to suggest that the President of the EU Commision would read a "carefully worded script" for any pressure group. His interview with Marr only covered the Scottish question for a few minutes at the end of his interview - most of the time was spent discussing Britaiin's relationship with the EU and he stated that Cameron had not even started discussions regarding a renegotiation of Britain's membership of the EU. He seemed very clear in his opinion that there were a few countries that would not support Scotland as an independent member of the EU as it would potentially have big internal issues for themselves - he clearly stated Spain and another country that I cannot now remember. Do you really believe the BBC could convince him to lie? I have tried to find out the detail behind the SNP campaign, but it seems to be lacking or not easily available. For instance one of the new policies was to provide full time education for all + 3 year olds and this would be funded from the taxes then being by the 150K women that would be free to work - but I see nowhere how these jobs would be created. Are there 150K vacancies out there just waiting to be filled? Then there are all the questions regarding the institutions that are currently carried in other parts of the UK that will not be available to Scotland? Driving Licences, Road Fund Licences, NHS, HM Revenue & Customs, etc etc. in addition what about the reverse? - UK jobs based in Scotland that will be lost, the obvious being Faslane? Instead of being accused of being a bully because these questions are being asked, why not answer them? If the vote is Yea, then the answers will have to be found. Personally, I am all in favour of Scottish independence as I have an intense dislike of "big government", but I think the SNP are doing ****e job in getting the detail and answers to legitimate questions in front of the people of this country.
Public spending in England averages £6500 per head of population. In Scotland it is around £9600 . Even if we were given the full revenue from North Sea oil & gas it would still leave a massive deficit of £9 billion, or £1300 per head of Sottish population. At the last count in 2010 Scotland raised around £35 billion in taxation - but public spending was around £78 billion. Meaning a subsidy from Westminster of approximately £43 billion.
Have no idea where you are getting those figures from frenchie - totally at odds with my source in terms of public spending per capita. In fact your public spending claim of £78bn would mean a population of around 8.5 million which simply isn't the case. The tax figure you quote is well understated too - even taking into account that my source doesn't include oil & gas revenue or corporation tax. Makes it a bit hard to argue....
Maybe so, but I have to wonder why they asked him for his opinion, rather than Graham Avery - Hon Director General of the European Commission, Senior Advisor at the European Policy Centre, and the man who negotiated UK's entry into the EC as well as wrote the membership application for 14 other countries. It could be something to do with the fact that he has been quoted as saying " voters should dismiss the UK government's anti-independence "tactics" and the "obscure" statements of European leaders which suggest and independent Scotland would face a difficult journey to EU membership." He has also given the opinion that an independent Scotland could expect to become a member of the European Union within 18 months of a yes vote. So who are we to believe? Re your question on whether there 150K vacancies waiting to be filled - I'd say that there could possibly be, if they resurrect the jobs that Westminster's cuts simply slashed. In Aberdeenshire alone in education, over 400 teaching assistant positions were simply axed - an act which I believe the SNP would reverse. As to the rest of your post, I admit that I don't have the answers you seek. I am, however, prepared to accept that the SNP have some plans ready in the event of a Yes vote, draft or otherwise - and I don't see that that releasing them at the moment is necessary. Why give the so-called Better Together group further possible ammunition when all they are interested in doing is denigrating? When all is said and done, do you really think that the Tories would be in power now if they had fully publicised their intentions prior to the 2010 election?
I am in Kuala Lumpur airport and can get into some of the threads on here but not "The next ten games", which appears to be blocked. What have you been saying to upset the Malaysian Government?
someone said you were going to be passing through customs hope you have some Vaseline in your carry on
Sæl öll. Cappuccino, coffee, tea donuts and fruit are on the bar. Frothy cappuccinos for al, HH, and W_Y Coffee and caramel frapachino for IB Coffees for COYH, Frenchie, Kev rob theo and vic-rijrode and kiwiqpr Strong coffee for Sandy Milky coffee for Yorkie Espresso for SuffolkHorn Strong black coffees for Bragi Norway and zen Black coffee half hot half cold and no sugar for Charlie Peppermint latte for DanH Tea for BHD Cornish Mark jsybarry Lloydinio NZ and BCFCRed Tea with skimmed milk and no sugar for GG and Leon Hot chocolate with marshmallows for BBW Caramel latte for Hornette Scullion Canary Dave Fossefilberto and Maestro Una paloma for Mexican Hornet We have -3,5stig this morning and the forcast is -10 for midweek, I just wish to be warm again.
Morning all, back from the vampires after Mme had to go in for a six monthly blood test. They are very good at testing you here even if you think you are in fine fettle. Maybe because of these tests they pick problems up early, all helping to keep treatment quite successful. Before I came to France I had never had a blood test, but was sent for one the day I signed up with the doctor. English and French humour is different though as I found out when I asked at the lab. if they could find any blood in my Bordeaux stream. They thought I was serious until I explained it was just a very poor joke.
Probably something to do with betting scams - 'they' don't want the punters to know that we're on the up.... Is it really any different to Toryland where lies, deceit and corruption are endemic?
Is it really any different to Toryland where lies, deceit and corruption are endemic?[/QUOTE] And, of course, Labourland where there are just as many lies, deceipt and corruption.
And, of course, Labourland where there are just as many lies, deceipt and corruption.[/QUOTE] The only safe island is ....... ? Libdemland
Beat me to it Mark. I just get a bit fed up of political bickering, whatever happened to whatever is best for the country? Yes, there are different opinions on how to get there but there should be consensus; not one group spending all their time undoing what the last lot did and vice versa - or even messing things up so badly in an underhand manner (because they know the will lose an election) that the next government will appear really horrid for trying to sort things out. Having lived and worked under various govenments of red and blue persuasions, I know when I felt a lot better and thos lead by Callaghan, Blair and Brown did not contribute to that, along with defence spending moratoria and the then uncontrolable power of certain unions. Interesting debate going on about cyclists over various threads. Senhora is to be charged with driving without due care and attention after being hit by a cyclist emerging from a minor road as she was turning into it from a major road;or to avoid prosecution she can admit guilt and go on a driver safety course, at the "priced exactly the same as the fine for the offence" fee of £180.00. Strange that the letter from the police assumes she is guilty in the first sentence, because the other road user is a cyclist. if the other road user were a motorist it would be them in the wrong.
