Caithness Map :: Links to Site Map Paying too much for broadband? Move to PlusNet broadband and save£££s. Free setup now available - terms apply. PlusNet broadband.  
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 138

Thread: Full Fiscal Autonomy FFA

  1. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squidge View Post
    Well now if we are starting again....
    There are no specifics in the manifesto, check it out yersel http://www.snp.org/sites/default/fil...o_290x280x.pdf as for FFA being a long process, well the more time spent on it the more time passes us by and so will our economic standing.
    Last edited by rob murray; 12-Jun-15 at 21:35.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    governess
    Posts
    5,249

    Default

    i said the manifesto was a good place to start not a recipe for a Fully fiscal autonomous Scotland.

    I cant alleviate your fears that FFA is going to take a long time Im afraid. FFA will take much longer to sort out than Independence would – as I have said already it is more complicated. It might take less time if we could be sure that the Labour Party would support an anti austerity agenda but we cant.

    The amendment next week will call for FFA and if that is accepted then the discussions will start as the policy is developed. There is little detail yet, however as I mentioned the SNP manifesto is a good place to start to establish the direction of travel. The SNP is anti austerity and they have spelled out what that means.

    It means stopping the austerity cuts which have had such a massive impact on the sick and disabled. Investing in infrastructure to create jobs and grow businesses.

    It means tackling the low wage culture through supporting businesses to pay better wages and through investing in good quality childcare to increase the number of people in work.

    It means investing in oil industry, technology and renewables to ensure Scotland is at the forefront of energy innovation

    It means a tax system which is not open to avoidance and which is tailored to the needs of Scotland.

    Until we know what powers we are getting we don’t know what, if any of the above we can do. You are right Rob. If we get FFA then we would expect to do All of the above, if we don’t then we cant do all of it but we might be able to do some of it. We have to see what happens.

    I have serious concerns about FFA but none of them stem from the idea that Scotland is too poor. I worry that we will not get the associated powers which make full fiscal autonomy a success - things like those i outlined in the first reply. I am not a little nervous that the tory government aided and abetted by labour will only offer half a job which will make it so much more difficult. I am concerned that FFA will take so long to implement that we will see Scotlands budget cut and cut and cut and the Scottish Government which has worked hard over the last few years to deliver a balanced budget and to mitigate the effects of the worst of the cuts will be unable to continue to do so.

    FFA/ DEvoMax, whatever you want to call it is no easy thing to do. It will take time and be long and drawn out and there is no guarantee we will see the amendement accepted. It is a poor substitute for Independence in my opinion but it is still better than what we have now because to be responsible for the country we have to have the economic levers to give us the power to do what we want to do and we dont have those now.
    Last edited by squidge; 12-Jun-15 at 22:30.

  3. #43
    BetterTogether is offline Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,239

    Default

    A nice post but it does avoid some major points. The usual what if they don't give us full powers is really just scaremongering. FFA is not devomax the two are entirely different to say that the Tories and Labour are going to give some watered down version is based on no substantive facts.

    If the country is given Full Fiscal Autonomy then that's what it will get all the levers and controls the go along with running the country it's not a half way house.
    The harsh realities are it means somewhere between an £8.6 to £10 billion pound deficit to begin with.

    That means the Scottish Government will either plunge the country further into debt or raise taxes and cut the public sector. There has to be growth in an economy to justify raising ever more and more debt or else the economy becomes woefully unstable.
    What I'd like to know is where the money is coming from to end austerity, to invest in oil and renewables.

    Making sweeping generalisations about such a major decisions doesn't really cut the mustard.

    You can't honestly expect to have the Barnett Formula and slowly introduce FFA as and when it suits at a pace that makes life easier when you want it to.

    The SNP are pushing for the amendments that means if things are accepted and they get their way then Scotland becomes a nation with twice the debt loading of rUK.

    I'd like to be kinder to your statements but they seem to show a lack of knowledge on financial issues and more of a wish list of things you'd like.
    The tax system would be that which the powers at Holyrood decide they are it won't be linked to rUK that's the whole point of it, all decisions become those of Holyrood.
    It's quite easy to bang on and on about ending austerity but the realities of FFA are they would implement more austerity on Scotland than the Tory Government is even considering.
    The Devils always in the detail and much as your post is eloquent in its desire there isnt any in depth knowledge of the way the economy of Scotland runs, where finance is raised and how it's spent.
    Please inform me if I'm totally incorrect as I'd like to be reassured on this issue.
    Last edited by BetterTogether; 12-Jun-15 at 22:46.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    governess
    Posts
    5,249

    Default

    I didnt realise that you wanted reassurance BT - or some sort of detailed breakdown. I thought this was a general discussion about FFA. I was simply presenting my opinions and absolutely my concerns about it - my concerns BT which I absolutely did not present as anything even approaching facts they ate simply my concerns. Again, it's important to note in this clamour for details that we havent even had the amendment yet, it hasnt been debated or passed yet.

    What we have is a set of aims of the Scottish Government which they would seek to implement if and when they have the ability to do so. A wish list maybe but it is actually a set aims to achieve the anti austerity based recovery which they stood for in the General Election. i know you dont agree that an anti austerity way is the way forward and thats ok - we dont have to agree but there are plenty of smarter and cleverer people than you or I who beleive that it is an alternative option for us. And they dont agree that it would plunge Scotland into further austerity. A report came out this week which suggested exactly the opposite of this. If the deficit is so terrible How come the UK and loads of other countries can run for years with a deficit but somehow Scotland cant?

    There is no suggestion that the SNP is planning to increase or give up on paying the deficit back - simply that they will take a bit longer and do it in a different way. With FFA, spending and cuts and taxation and growth will be approached in a different way. Also, The projections for the deficit sitting at £8 billion all suppose that Scotland will continue running the economy the same way as the tories are doing right now. That they will do nothing different and that isnt the case. In addition an Anti Austerity programme for Scotland is one that lots of people in Scotland voted for - thats why the SNP have 56 out of 59 MPs because people saw their manifesto and wanted something different. More People agreed with the SNP that there is a different way to go than agreed that we should continue with the Tory austerity agenda. This means that the SNP is absolutely right to push for the powers that would enable them to achieve the aims set out in their manifesto.

    I will say what i said during the referendum about the economics of independence as the same is true now. For either viewpoint for or against FFA there is expert opinion to support the case whichever way you look at it. IF you believe that the tories have it right and Austerity is the way to go for a strong economy and a happy society then you wont support FFA. If you dont then you will be looking to FFA to give the Scottish Government the power to take a different road. Either viewpoint can be supported and is valid.

    Im sure we will all be watching the SNP put forward their amendments next week as the bill is debated and scrutinised and we will all be interested in hearing the arguments for and against FFA. In the meantime - i have my concerns and you have yours. That doesnt mean that either of us are wrong but it does mean that there is much work to do yet. Tommy Sheppard said today that "If there was a will to see the Scottish Government take responsibility for its own finances this process could be achieved smoothly and effectively. It would make for better government. Most importantly, it would allow the people of Scotland to choose their own economic priorities and marshal the public resources for the good of all." That's it really.
    Last edited by squidge; 13-Jun-15 at 09:49.

  5. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squidge View Post
    i said the manifesto was a good place to start not a recipe for a Fully fiscal autonomous Scotland.

    I cant alleviate your fears that FFA is going to take a long time Im afraid. FFA will take much longer to sort out than Independence would – as I have said already it is more complicated. It might take less time if we could be sure that the Labour Party would support an anti austerity agenda but we cant.

    The amendment next week will call for FFA and if that is accepted then the discussions will start as the policy is developed. There is little detail yet, however as I mentioned the SNP manifesto is a good place to start to establish the direction of travel. The SNP is anti austerity and they have spelled out what that means.

    It means stopping the austerity cuts which have had such a massive impact on the sick and disabled. Investing in infrastructure to create jobs and grow businesses.

    It means tackling the low wage culture through supporting businesses to pay better wages and through investing in good quality childcare to increase the number of people in work.

    It means investing in oil industry, technology and renewables to ensure Scotland is at the forefront of energy innovation

    It means a tax system which is not open to avoidance and which is tailored to the needs of Scotland.

    Until we know what powers we are getting we don’t know what, if any of the above we can do. You are right Rob. If we get FFA then we would expect to do All of the above, if we don’t then we cant do all of it but we might be able to do some of it. We have to see what happens.

    I have serious concerns about FFA but none of them stem from the idea that Scotland is too poor. I worry that we will not get the associated powers which make full fiscal autonomy a success - things like those i outlined in the first reply. I am not a little nervous that the tory government aided and abetted by labour will only offer half a job which will make it so much more difficult. I am concerned that FFA will take so long to implement that we will see Scotlands budget cut and cut and cut and the Scottish Government which has worked hard over the last few years to deliver a balanced budget and to mitigate the effects of the worst of the cuts will be unable to continue to do so.

    FFA/ DEvoMax, whatever you want to call it is no easy thing to do. It will take time and be long and drawn out and there is no guarantee we will see the amendement accepted. It is a poor substitute for Independence in my opinion but it is still better than what we have now because to be responsible for the country we have to have the economic levers to give us the power to do what we want to do and we dont have those now.
    A good informative post Squidge, appreciate your concerns over time period involved and opportunity to cut scottish budgets which I rather suspect is the government tactics to strip scotland to the point that FFA would be off the agenda for a long time. I hope you noticed from my posts that I pointed out the scare over declining oil prices and its affect as mentioned by Labour etc I countered this with a direct quote ""oil price forecasts have been the most volatile revenue stream and are SUBJECT TO LARGE SCALE FORECAST ERRORS EVEN OVER THE SHORT TERM. In other words the anti FFA people have conjured up the very WORST case scenario as deliberate scare mongering. Sure OIl prices will take a long while to bounce back and the North seas has declining hydrocarbons, but wells that become uneconomic have to be de commissioned...so that creates work and buys time for whoever is in power to formulate an industrial re generation strategy.

    Oh I am not arrogant nor self important Squidge read my posts on here, I tried to make factual not personal comments and all I wanted was some detail behind a scottish economic strategy, if we dont have a strong economy then living wages / welfare etc will be off the agenda unless the money is borrowed.Its a fact that the manifesto doesn't have any depth on at least priorities...in my veiw the LD's was the strongest manifesto by far, factual and targeted, key issues...high speed broad band for one / digital connectivity / creating enhancing jobs, rural regeneration etc....) My best friend is a senior SNP activist, he is well aware of the need to re industrialize scotland, to build a high wage, high value, low tax economy, create IPR and not rely on low wage screw driver jobs,( what the tories would claim is growth...aye growth of low paid work ) he has fears over oil and the non progression of renewables ( wave / tidal ) Now Im not one for grudges and as promised have collated informed reading ( including HIE/ SE / Scottish Government sources, plus an analysis paper that my friend and I put together ) on the current state of play in renewables. Theres a lot of quality information there..how do I get it to you ?
    Last edited by rob murray; 13-Jun-15 at 11:13.

  6. #46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squidge View Post
    #

    How am I supposed to respond to 27 posts? YOu and BT just talk to yourselves. Did i spit the dummy out absolutely i did. 27 bloody posts demanding answers NOW. I have a life you know.
    I wasnt expecting you to respond there are plenty people out there as well.....I started the thread, on the basis of accepting reality, the SNP have the powers in Scotland and almost a monopoly in westminster re Scottish MP's, so their stated aim is FFA, I just wanted to know a bit more economic depth thats all, I accept the new politically reality, so feel that I an entitled to ask for some clarity, which is what I did, although I accept we are dealing with a more complex scenario than I realized, its not my fault that the major contributions came from better together.

  7. #47
    Tig is offline Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    5

    Default

    there only seems to be Squidge that is in support of the SNP and FFA on this thread, where are the other supporters?

    It is a complex matter and its a good discussion brought out into a public space where ordinary folks like myself can read through different points of view with factual links to read. I'm in no position to comment but I am following with interest.

  8. #48
    BetterTogether is offline Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,239

    Default

    I fully accept that FFA is a difficult subject to grasp if it weren't then we would all be out there with economics degrees and able to give our various informed opinions on the subject.
    Failing that we must look to those experts who put forward their varied opinions.
    I have searched for more information and dutifully read as much as is currently available on the issue ( I concede I may have missed a few articles ) the reality as I see it at the moment can be fairly easily summarised.
    The SNP have put forward and supported the idea of FFA with limited reading to support their request.
    I have yet to see a paper released by a well respected academic that supports the concept.
    That is not to say it isn't possible and may not work.
    What there is though is a plethora of information on statistics and articles on why it would be problematic at best.
    I've listened to the likes of Stewart Hosie, John Swinney, Tommy Shepperd and of course the First Minister in all the talks they've had that are publicly accessible at the moment there seems to be a frustrating lack of detail in their proposals. That goes from their manifesto on through various interviews.
    They so far appear to be very good at using historical arguments of why the UK government has previously done and got things wrong, which is fair enough but what they are singularly failing to do so far is given a reasoned, balanced description of how it is supposed to work and what they intend to do that is so radically different that the problems will be negated.
    If they are so confident this is the right thing to do for the country then I'd of thought at this stage there would be some more meat on the bones of their idea.
    We are at a stage still where they are expecting and hoping to get the amendments pushed through and gain FFA but haven't let us know what they are actually going to do.
    Why is it a concern.
    Who really wants to live in a country that is saddled with an economy that could easily slide down the route of Greece, Spain, Eire, Italy that would not be good for the people of Scotland and so I feel it is only right that we the electorate are given greater insight into what their thoughts and aspirations are.
    Much is espoused about this being an exciting new time in politics and how the SNP are progressive. But at the moment I'm just not seeing it.
    It's not personal I can vehemently disagree with someone political views but still respect them, on this single item the information is just not being made available.
    Last edited by BetterTogether; 13-Jun-15 at 11:38.

  9. #49
    BetterTogether is offline Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,239

    Default

    How about we deal with some UK Govt figures as there doesn't seem to be any others available.

    To provide similar levels of public services over the next 20 yrs.

    Scotland would need to raise all onshore tax receipts by 13%.

    That would equate to a 28% rate of basic income rate tax and a 26% rate of VAT.

    Also increasing the main duties alcohol, tobacco, fuel and cars by almost 40%.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    governess
    Posts
    5,249

    Default

    You miss the point a bit though BT - the point of having FFA is not to run things exactly as they are now, like a branch office of UKPLC. We might pay higher taxes, we might pay lower taxes. We might have similar services we may do things differently. The point is that with FFA we get much more of a say in what happens So that the next time we return 95% of MPs from the same party - whether that is SNP, labour, Green, Tory or whatever other party pops up to fill the vacuum then they get to implement the changes that they want to implement and that we elected then for. The figures you show pre suppose that we get the purse but have to keep the same shopping list. We don't.

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    governess
    Posts
    5,249

    Default

    Rob, I pm'd you my email address.

    Edit - or I would have done if it hadn't bounced back!!!! Empty your inbox lol
    Last edited by squidge; 13-Jun-15 at 12:51.

  12. #52
    BetterTogether is offline Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,239

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squidge View Post
    You miss the point a bit though BT - the point of having FFA is not to run things exactly as they are now, like a branch office of UKPLC. We might pay higher taxes, we might pay lower taxes. We might have similar services we may do things differently. The point is that with FFA we get much more of a say in what happens So that the next time we return 95% of MPs from the same party - whether that is SNP, labour, Green, Tory or whatever other party pops up to fill the vacuum then they get to implement the changes that they want to implement and that we elected then for. The figures you show pre suppose that we get the purse but have to keep the same shopping list. We don't.
    You're quite correct that if FFA is implemented that any future party that has a majority within Holyrood will be able to make policy as they choose regarding funding the country on that I can agree with you with no issue at all.

    You're also quite correct in saying we could raise or lower taxes as we saw fit and may have similar services or change them completely.

    Non of those are really in question or really deal with the problem.

    If Scotland wishes to maintain the public services it currently has for the next 20 yrs and does not want to plunge the country into huge levels of debt then it requires taxes to be raised.

    In many of your posts you discuss quite eloquently increasing services and investing in infrastructure.

    That is money that would have to be borrowed if not raised in taxation which means that the countries debt would increase exponentially.
    You can't have a richer more prosperous country with higher wages,lower taxes a larger public sector unless you plunge it into a mountain of debt, which has to be repaid at some stage.
    We have many examples globally of countries that have increased their debt without laying sound foundations for repaying it and do not possess an economy that can comfortably sustain it.
    This isn't about party politics as the same decisions would be faced by whomever runs Scotland.

    There is a reality at play if Scotland gets FFA in the short term it will be a poorer country for it.

    I'd be more than happy if you can provide me with some economic forecast that shows otherwise.

    If this where the corporate world and the SNP where proposing a change in direction for that corporation without having done all their homework and without being able to present hard facts and figures that coherently back up their supposition, they would be laughed out of the boardroom.

    This isn't a corporate entity it's far larger, far more complex so surely the SNP have done their homework, consultation must of been undertaken, economic advisors employed to present their findings. So why is it non of that groundwork is available for public consumption.
    Last edited by BetterTogether; 13-Jun-15 at 13:38.

  13. #53
    BetterTogether is offline Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,239

    Default

    A nice article from the Scotsman on FFA and proposed Amendments

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/politic...uble-1-3801144
    Last edited by BetterTogether; 13-Jun-15 at 14:54.

  14. #54
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Caithness
    Posts
    986

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BetterTogether View Post
    A nice article from the Scotsman on FFA and proposed Amendments

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/politic...uble-1-3801144
    An even nicer article from Business Scotland on FFA.

    http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk...scal-autonomy/

  15. #55
    BetterTogether is offline Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,239

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shabbychic View Post
    An even nicer article from Business Scotland on FFA.http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk...scal-autonomy/
    Much as I'd like to take businessforscotland seriously they aren't really representative of major business within Scotland that actually do business across the UK or Globally. I do believe and will try and find the article that they are a group made up of single traders, hairdressers and companies that have neglible turnover.

  16. #56
    BetterTogether is offline Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,239

    Default

    Here it is a break down of who business for Scotland actually are and what they actually do.http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/201...represent.html

    Hardly representative of Scotlands major employers in fact hardly representative of the middle ranking group of employers.

  17. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    governess
    Posts
    5,249

    Default Sorry it's a long post - it's a big subject! .

    There are key ways in which Scotland could do things differently with the economy if it had FFA, things that aren't being done now or that with controls over raising our own money and spending and investing our own money we could see the economy grow and there is plenty of evidence out there to support different strategies to the austerity one we see from the Tories.

    We have been talking about investing in capital projects to help grow the economy. The Scottish Government has been doing that already. This works in several ways, it creates jobs and therefore wealth, it creates confidence in investors that Scotland is a forward thinking and growing economy and therefore a good place to invest for example. There are figures from various sources which show how this works but Civil Engineering industry figures show that for every £1 billion of investments in infrastructure GDP increases by £1.3 billion and there is a knock on in that, as it creates a more competitive environment for business then it gives an economic benefit of £2.8 billion as more companies see Scotland as a place to invest and create work. We may need to borrow to do that, just like you may need to borrow on a mortgage to replace a failing roof and increase the value of your house. That might lead to increased repayments or taking longer to pay the mortgage back but you would reckon the benefits are worth it. Also just like your failing roof - the work is absolutely necessary. That's a bit simplistic but it serves an illustrative purpose. Borrowing to invest in capital projects is worth it for the payback in the terms of benefits to the economy. We were talking in the post about the NHS of the need for better infrastructure and this is a way to ensure that we do that.

    I talk about inequality often as a welfare issue but it's an economic issue too. Investment in childcare increases the number of parents able to work, reduces the welfare bill and improves employment levels. Better education, ensuring that children live in homes where they are getting enough food, warmth and a place to study and grow. Where poverty grows educational attainment falls. Better support and encouragement to move people into work and high quality jobs programmes are all needed to create a vibrant, educated and work ready population. The Scottish government has had much better success with its community jobs fund and modern apprenticeships, than the appalling parody of a work programme that the Tories have in place. Changing the way we mange benefits would reduce costs, improve outcomes and increase people moving into work with very little expense. In fact the SNP are committed to stopping the roll out of the massively massively expensive white elephant that is universal Credit and the utter waste of money that the DLA replacement PIP is turning out to be. Just doing this would reduce spending in Scotland without making one single cut . By reducing inequality we are able to contribute to growing our economy. A fairer society isn't just a pipe dream of a woolly liberal, it's a necessity if we want the strongest possible economy.

    Supporting business is of course key, the Scottish Government is committed to staying in Europe and it is massively important for all sorts of businesses that we do so. Scotland must grow its exports and its “brand” to be successful. The referendum turned up information to show that Britains embassies abroad charge Scotland for promoting whisky. What's that all about? In addition, Scotland’s whisky exports and the duty paid for those exports are not credited to Scotland's accounts as it stands at the moment. They don't appear on the figures for Scotland. That would change. The SNP has dropped its commitment to a reduction in corporation tax and confirms its commitment to SME's in its manifesto. It has promised a better fairer tax regime in everything it has put out for the last ten years, ensuring that there is no avoidance and better targeted investment. We need the Amazons of this world I'm sure but we also need the smaller companies to have the opportunity to grow and we could do this through changing the tax regime.

    We also need to be innovative. We need to encourage research and development particularly in the green economy, in renewables, green energy and so on. Now I know nothing much about energy – as you will see I have been in a conversation with Rob about this - but there are clearly issues and opportunities to be grabbed. The Scottish Government is committed to better investment but we have work to do to see how we can do this better. I'm not simply talking about wind either. I tend to think we need to change our approach to how we use wind energy. In Europe it appears many countries encourage small developments rather than The large windfarms we see here. So each village has its own windmills and they seem much happier with that than we do here. Where my parents live they have three windmills servicing a number of scattered villages and they are really positive about them. There was an attempt to do something similar on the Black Isle recently but it failed to get enough support. Maybe Rob can talk to us about these issues. I know I haven't talked about oil. But with or without oil Scotland has the ability to do all the things I talked about with FFA. Without FFA it can only do a small bit and even with FFA we can't do as much as we could have with Independence.

    Finally and I knew this was going to be a long one but I have to remind you of this. FFA is not independence. Scotland with FFA will not be in a position to do all this stuff at once or maybe even never. This is why there is little actual detail. Some of the things I have spoken about – like ending the roll out of PIP, like the investments proposed for capital projects are there already. Reinstating the 50p tax rate, closing tax loopholes are also proposed but even these may be difficult. It all depends on what the UK lets us have. Just like we had to ask for the money to offset the bedroom tax because we don't have permission from WM to abolish it FFA is dependent on getting permission from the government.

    Even with FFA there will still continue to need to be a financial settlement every single year as we negotiate how much we have we to pay Westminster for x or y; for which project we need to contribute towards; for how we have our voices heard in Europe; to ensure that things like the CAP funding reaches our farmers and isn't held onto by Westminster as it is being now – all £135 million of it; how our ministers are included in things like fisheries negotiations – Richard Lochhead, the longest serving fisheries minister in Europe - is excluded from those negotiations at the moment, that can't happen if we have FFA. I have massive concerns about FFA but we need control over tax, spending and borrowing if we are to do ANYTHING to move Scotland in the direction that people voted for when they sent 56 SNP MPs to Westminster.
    Last edited by squidge; 14-Jun-15 at 12:58.

  18. #58
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Caithness
    Posts
    986

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BetterTogether View Post
    Much as I'd like to take businessforscotland seriously they aren't really representative of major business within Scotland that actually do business across the UK or Globally. I do believe and will try and find the article that they are a group made up of single traders, hairdressers and companies that have neglible turnover.


    Quote Originally Posted by BetterTogether View Post
    Here it is a break down of who business for Scotland actually are and what they actually do.http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/201...represent.html

    Hardly representative of Scotlands major employers in fact hardly representative of the middle ranking group of employers.

    This is why folks find there is little point in entering a discussion with you. You ask a question, then eagerly await a response so that you can tear it to shreds to prove you are right. You have no interest at all in seeing anyone else's point of view, or entering into a meaningful discussion. You are just like the unionist parties who, instead of putting forward what they stand for, spend all their time slating the SNP.

    As for the above, the link I left was not about who Business for Scotland are made up of, but in relation to the article and what this thread is supposed to be about, namely FFA. You quite happily quote from places like The Scotsman, and then expect to be taken seriously, while dissing everyone else.

  19. #59
    BetterTogether is offline Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,239

    Default

    I can fully accept alternative points of view but the reality is Business for Scotland isn't representative of large business in Scotland if you want to have a decent debate quote someone other than a politically motivated SNP mouthpiece.

    Debate is about discussing opposing views just because I've yet to be convinced that the SNP, Independence and FFA are good for Scotland. Would you prefer i take the route the Majority of Unionists have done and just keep quiet so the Nationalist can just debate with themselves. Hardly seems democratic we see this across the web nationalists getting upset when any unionist defends the status quo.
    Last edited by BetterTogether; 14-Jun-15 at 14:22.

  20. #60
    BetterTogether is offline Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,239

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squidge View Post
    There are key ways in which Scotland could do things differently with the economy if it had FFA, things that aren't being done now or that with controls over raising our own money and spending and investing our own money we could see the economy grow and there is plenty of evidence out there to support different strategies to the austerity one we see from the Tories. We have been talking about investing in capital projects to help grow the economy. The Scottish Government has been doing that already. This works in several ways, it creates jobs and therefore wealth, it creates confidence in investors that Scotland is a forward thinking and growing economy and therefore a good place to invest for example. There are figures from various sources which show how this works but Civil Engineering industry figures show that for every £1 billion of investments in infrastructure GDP increases by £1.3 billion and there is a knock on in that, as it creates a more competitive environment for business then it gives an economic benefit of £2.8 billion as more companies see Scotland as a place to invest and create work. We may need to borrow to do that, just like you may need to borrow on a mortgage to replace a failing roof and increase the value of your house. That might lead to increased repayments or taking longer to pay the mortgage back but you would reckon the benefits are worth it. Also just like your failing roof - the work is absolutely necessary. That's a bit simplistic but it serves an illustrative purpose. Borrowing to invest in capital projects is worth it for the payback in the terms of benefits to the economy. We were talking in the post about the NHS of the need for better infrastructure and this is a way to ensure that we do that.I talk about inequality often as a welfare issue but it's an economic issue too. Investment in childcare increases the number of parents able to work, reduces the welfare bill and improves employment levels. Better education, ensuring that children live in homes where they are getting enough food, warmth and a place to study and grow. Where poverty grows educational attainment falls. Better support and encouragement to move people into work and high quality jobs programmes are all needed to create a vibrant, educated and work ready population. The Scottish government has had much better success with its community jobs fund and modern apprenticeships, than the appalling parody of a work programme that the Tories have in place. Changing the way we mange benefits would reduce costs, improve outcomes and increase people moving into work with very little expense. In fact the SNP are committed to stopping the roll out of the massively massively expensive white elephant that is universal Credit and the utter waste of money that the DLA replacement PIP is turning out to be. Just doing this would reduce spending in Scotland without making one single cut . By reducing inequality we are able to contribute to growing our economy. A fairer society isn't just a pipe dream of a woolly liberal, it's a necessity if we want the strongest possible economy. Supporting business is of course key, the Scottish Government is committed to staying in Europe and it is massively important for all sorts of businesses that we do so. Scotland must grow its exports and its “brand” to be successful. The referendum turned up information to show that Britains embassies abroad charge Scotland for promoting whisky. What's that all about? In addition, Scotland’s whisky exports and the duty paid for those exports are not credited to Scotland's accounts as it stands at the moment. They don't appear on the figures for Scotland. That would change. The SNP has dropped its commitment to a reduction in corporation tax and confirms its commitment to SME's in its manifesto. It has promised a better fairer tax regime in everything it has put out for the last ten years, ensuring that there is no avoidance and better targeted investment. We need the Amazons of this world I'm sure but we also need the smaller companies to have the opportunity to grow and we could do this through changing the tax regime.We also need to be innovative. We need to encourage research and development particularly in the green economy, in renewables, green energy and so on. Now I know nothing much about energy – as you will see I have been in a conversation with Rob about this - but there are clearly issues and opportunities to be grabbed. The Scottish Government is committed to better investment but we have work to do to see how we can do this better. I'm not simply talking about wind either. I tend to think we need to change our approach to how we use wind energy. In Europe it appears many countries encourage small developments rather than The large windfarms we see here. So each village has its own windmills and they seem much happier with that than we do here. Where my parents live they have three windmills servicing a number of scattered villages and they are really positive about them. There was an attempt to do something similar on the Black Isle recently but it failed to get enough support. Maybe Rob can talk to us about these issues. I know I haven't talked about oil. But with or without oil Scotland has the ability to do all the things I talked about with FFA. Without FFA it can only do a small bit and even with FFA we can't do as much as we could have with Independence. Finally and I knew this was going to be a long one but I have to remind you of this. FFA is not independence. Scotland with FFA will not be in a position to do all this stuff at once or maybe even never. This is why there is little actual detail. Some of the things I have spoken about – like ending the roll out of PIP, like the investments proposed for capital projects are there already. Reinstating the 50p tax rate, closing tax loopholes are also proposed but even these may be difficult. It all depends on what the UK lets us have. Just like we had to ask for the money to offset the bedroom tax because we don't have permission from WM to abolish it FFA is dependent on getting permission from the government. Even with FFA there will still continue to need to be a financial settlement every single year as we negotiate how much we have we to pay Westminster for x or y; for which project we need to contribute towards; for how we have our voices heard in Europe; to ensure that things like the CAP funding reaches our farmers and isn't held onto by Westminster as it is being now – all £135 million of it; how our ministers are included in things like fisheries negotiations – Richard Lochhead, the longest serving fisheries minister in Europe - is excluded from those negotiations at the moment, that can't happen if we have FFA. I have massive concerns about FFA but we need control over tax, spending and borrowing if we are to do ANYTHING to move Scotland in the direction that people voted for when they sent 56 SNP MPs to Westminster.
    I did type out a long post but it appears some would prefer to shut down debate on e org and have just one side doing the talking. So much for a more democratic free and fairer society. It's beginning to feel more and more like a country I'd rather not live in anymore. Daily it becomes more like a one party state.
    Last edited by BetterTogether; 14-Jun-15 at 14:31.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •