//What Action Can The Cranky Mp's Take?// Perhaps they will refuse to accept the "extra funding" allocated to Scotland, with an aside that they will not be patronised?
Can somebody please explain the ‘extra funding’ Scotland gets? It is true that per head of population Scots get a higher amount than the rUK except London. However the overall amount sent in various taxes to the treasury is a great deal more than they receive back through Barnett
Perhaps you could apprise yourself of the correct situation and correct your replies, anne and Roman, - Scotland has been subsidised by the rest of the UK for the last 20 years at least - £15 billion in 2015/2016 :
I love Scotland, and I like (by and large) the Scots. I have no wish to change the current fiscal balance - it's manageable and worthwhile whilst Scotland is in the UK.
I also recognise that Scotland is fully entitled to decide to leave the UK - although I'd rather it didn't - but if it does go, then all bets are off on subsidy and I'm afraid my (not very funny) jibe of "Greece without the Sunshine" will be all too true.
They have two choices: like it or lump it. Westminster is taking the UK out of the EU so they can either go along with it, albeit reluctantly, or have a second independence referendum. Should that prove to be in favour then they're on their own. Don't forget that Westminster has the power to prorogue the Scottish parliament and impose direct rule, as they did in NI in 1972.
Sunny-Dave, I'll see your article and raise you:
http://www.businessforscotland.com/where-does-scotlands-wealth-go/
Also Jackdaw Westminster may technically have the power to impose Direct Rule, however the situation in NI in 1972 was very different to that of Scotland now. It was in 1972 to stabilise the country during the troubles. No such situation in Scotland so no reason to impose it, and in fact I would suggest that to do so would be an extreme form of provocation that would make the current constitutional crisis look like a storm in a teacup.
I’ve seen that before Roman - it’s a farrago of smoke and mirrors that (ab)uses some very dubious assumptions about finances from many years before Scottish Independence was even considered.
It assumes that the rest of the UK would have to pay back some ludicrous ‘inflation adjusted’ compensation for ‘debts’ that are not even properly quantified - it also assumes that all oil revenue should have gone to Scotland - even though the oil was paid for and extracted using UK funding.
Nonsense with a capital ‘non’ - unlike my figures which actually come from the Scottisg Government - rather than a politically biased think-tank.
We can bat figures about all day, the article you quoted is not exactly accurate either it quotes Scotland’s share of the UK deficit as £15b. The entire UK deficit is around £46.9b so Scotland’s share of that would be more like £4.2b.
Then we stop all this nonsense and the Scottish can go on their merry way. Won't be in the EU though as the EU have said they wont have them - whether or not the UK is in or out.
No they haven’t, they have actually said that as Scotland already fulfills EU membership rules, being in the EU, that they would be fast tracked in. Even Spain has said it would not object.
I can't wait for it to unfold, be it chaotic or not. The idea being bandied about that we should reconsider, or go for some sort of half-hearted fudge because it might be a bit difficult is pathetic.
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.