HS2 Fiasco

[aaid]

1 hour ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Still coming out of Scottish taxes and returned via Barnett Formula which I bet guarantees less comes back to Scotland than came out.

Barnett is actually a higher rate than a per capita share of population.

[Caledonian Craig]

7 minutes ago, aaid said:

Barnett is actually a higher rate than a per capita share of population.

If that is the case then Westminster must be intensely thick. Take Scottish taxes to pay for something that has no benefit to Scotland and then pay for money back into Scottish coffers than they got.

[StirlingEgg]

2 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

If that is the case then Westminster must be intensely thick. Take Scottish taxes to pay for something that has no benefit to Scotland and then pay for money back into Scottish coffers than they got.

If it is indeed an overly generous arrangement for Scotland then it seems like an easy thing to pull the plug on to placate voters down South. Unionists and folk in England bring it up all the time re how we pay for the 'free stuff' and I'm never sure exactly what the true picture is. Would we be much better off keeping all our own money and that's what they are hiding so they just go along with Barnett because it appears to be advantageous? Genuine question. 

[Rich NATA]

The government is preparing a “fire sale” of land bought for HS2 north of Birmingham in a bid to prevent future administrations from reviving the plans. According to reports in The Times, vast swathes of land is to be sold off within weeks, at a loss.

 

 

 

HS2... Like the PPE contracts... I can't help feeling some people should be in prison.

[Dave78]

2 hours ago, StirlingEgg said:

If it is indeed an overly generous arrangement for Scotland then it seems like an easy thing to pull the plug on to placate voters down South. Unionists and folk in England bring it up all the time re how we pay for the 'free stuff' and I'm never sure exactly what the true picture is. Would we be much better off keeping all our own money and that's what they are hiding so they just go along with Barnett because it appears to be advantageous? Genuine question. 

If i remember right (and someone please correct me if i have this wrong), Barnett was created in response to Scotland finding its spectacular oil wealth in the 1970s. It was deliberately designed to be generous as a counter to the 'It's Scotland's oil' campaign from the SNP.

It's been a great deal for the rUK and very successful, and is seen as a price worth paying by English unionists. For Scots who look across the north sea to Norway, not so much.

[GroundsKeeper]

20 minutes ago, Dave78 said:

If i remember right (and someone please correct me if i have this wrong), Barnett was created in response to Scotland finding its spectacular oil wealth in the 1970s. It was deliberately designed to be generous as a counter to the 'It's Scotland's oil' campaign from the SNP.

It's been a great deal for the rUK and very successful, and is seen as a price worth paying by English unionists. For Scots who look across the north sea to Norway, not so much.

Good post

[StirlingEgg]

22 minutes ago, Dave78 said:

If i remember right (and someone please correct me if i have this wrong), Barnett was created in response to Scotland finding its spectacular oil wealth in the 1970s. It was deliberately designed to be generous as a counter to the 'It's Scotland's oil' campaign from the SNP.

It's been a great deal for the rUK and very successful, and is seen as a price worth paying by English unionists. For Scots who look across the north sea to Norway, not so much.

Thank you 👍

I think I've been getting mixed up with the GERS figures and Ian Laing being leaked quoting them as conceived as a political exercise. 

 

[Orraloon]

9 hours ago, aaid said:

Barnett consequentials work this way.

Lets say a project in England costs £1billion over 10 years and is subject to Barnett in Scotland, then over that 10 year period Scotland will get £117 million  - 2019 numbers - added to that budget over that 10 year period.   The Scottish Government decides what it wants to spend that money on.

The UK Treasury to fund that £1billion project needs to raise £1.117 billion, usually through borrowing and needs to pay that debt back over time.   

So we get additional money, decide what we spend it on, and then have to pay back the money that was borrowed to give to us.   

It's still Scottish taxes that has to pay back "our share" of that borrowing plus interest.

[aaid]

20 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

It's still Scottish taxes that has to pay back "our share" of that borrowing plus interest.

Did you think it was free?

[Wull the Gull]

On 10/25/2023 at 9:09 PM, Orraloon said:

It's still Scottish taxes that has to pay back "our share" of that borrowing plus interest.

So, Westminister uses our taxes to pay for stuff in England and in return we get paid back from Barnett.

Curious....if the UK is in so much debt that we have to borrow on international  markets who pays this?

Is Barnett a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul?   Is Westminister borrowing money to pay us back and we end up paying for whats been borrowed? 

[Ally Bongo]

1 hour ago, Wull the Gull said:

So, Westminister uses our taxes to pay for stuff in England and in return we get paid back from Barnett.

Curious....if the UK is in so much debt that we have to borrow on international  markets who pays this?

Is Barnett a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul?   Is Westminister borrowing money to pay us back and we end up paying for whats been borrowed? 

Below is what was predicted to happen after 2014

It's taken a little longer but it is happening now

Basically all of Scotland's tax revenues go to Westminster say approx £60 billion plus

They then give us less than half of that money back and keep the rest to "spend on our behalf" - like Nuclear Weapons, Army, Navy, Air Force, London Crossrail, HS2 etc etc 

https://wingsoverscotland.com/how-scotland-will-be-robbed/

And how they use an accounting trick to say we get more than we put in

https://www.businessforscotland.com/the-barnett-formula-myth-destroyed-it-does-not-subsidise-scotland/

 

Edited December 9, 2023 by Ally Bongo

[Orraloon]

3 hours ago, Wull the Gull said:

So, Westminister uses our taxes to pay for stuff in England and in return we get paid back from Barnett.

Curious....if the UK is in so much debt that we have to borrow on international  markets who pays this?

Is Barnett a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul?   Is Westminister borrowing money to pay us back and we end up paying for whats been borrowed? 

It wouldn't be so bad if we were actually paying any of the debt back but we aren't. We are only paying back the interest.

The debt just gets bigger and bigger every day. The debt is increasing by about £5000 per second. Yes, per second.

This gives us some idea about how fast the debt is growing.

https://www.nationaldebtclock.co.uk/

[Wull the Gull]

22 hours ago, Orraloon said:

It wouldn't be so bad if we were actually paying any of the debt back but we aren't. We are only paying back the interest.

The debt just gets bigger and bigger every day. The debt is increasing by about £5000 per second. Yes, per second.

This gives us some idea about how fast the debt is growing.

https://www.nationaldebtclock.co.uk/

I was in America in the run up to the referendum. I picked up a copy of an American finance magazine and read it on the flight home. Inside it was an article on the referendum and the finances of Scotland, and how she would become a very wealthy country on becoming Independent.

The article spoke at length about how Scotland had never contributed to the debt of the UK apart from a couple of years in the 80's and had a surplus in its economy for the last 30 years. It also said that in a court of law Scotland would walk away from the debt the rUK because it had never contributed to it.

I've always believed this is the real reason Westminister is so keen to keep a grip of us.