The 3p variance was never really a viable option as the cost of implementing and maintaining it would have negated the upside of any revenue it would have generated. If they'd lowered the tax rate, the cost of implementation and maintenance would need to be counted as an additional loss of revenue.
So................................we don't have Tax raising powers and therefore my post was correct.
TBH I don't live in Scotland now, being one of the hundreds of thousands of Scots who've moved to England due to work/family reasons that you so keenly denied a vote too. Not that I have any desire to move back after a Yes vote because I'm quite convinced the SNP plan is the road to economic and social disaster.
What I would say is if I could go back to 1997 I'd tell the young naive 18 year old me to vote No to both questions, because one day, you will massively regret the ugly genie you've let out of the lamp.
I have been thinking about something and just wondered if I am way off or what your thoughts are. Imagine the vote came back something like Yes - 51% No - 49% then would that carry as a Yes vote?
The No campaign are simply saying no, we don't want to change. The Yes camp though are the ones actively looking to make massive changes and therefore have to convince the majority of the country to agree to it.
Is there any set percentage that Yes has to get in order to be carried?
In the event of a marginal scrape through would Westminster have the power to veto any constitutional changes and would they do it?
The West Lothian question remains unresolved. That's why.
Is the West Lothian question really a burning issue for most English voters? Wouldn't have thought so. Equally I doubt that most people would be all that bothered about giving Scotland more powers, as long as it doesn't mean Scotland receiving more money from Westminster than it currently does - which seems unlikely.
Is the West Lothian question really a burning issue for most English voters? Wouldn't have thought so. Equally I doubt that most people would be all that bothered about giving Scotland more powers, as long as it doesn't mean Scotland receiving more money from Westminster than it currently does - which seems unlikely.
Well now, that's a different question. In any event, it doesn't just affect Scotland; it also affects Scotland's relationship with the rest of the home nations. Why more powers for Scotland but not for any other home nation or region? Why should Scottish MPs still get to vote in Westminster on matters devolved to Scotland? The annoyance felt by people will only increase the more devolved powers Scotland gets.
TBH I don't live in Scotland now, being one of the hundreds of thousands of Scots who've moved to England due to work/family reasons that you so keenly denied a vote too. Not that I have any desire to move back after a Yes vote because I'm quite convinced the SNP plan is the road to economic and social disaster.
What I would say is if I could go back to 1997 I'd tell the young naive 18 year old me to vote No to both questions, because one day, you will massively regret the ugly genie you've let out of the lamp.
The question needs to be asked of Better Together... If Scotland is doing so well in the in the UK, why is there such a huge brain drain of young people out of Scotland, to England and overseas? Why isn't there sufficient economic opportunities in Scotland to keep them there? A country where people of working age leave in droves is not one that is thriving as well as it could or should.
Well now, that's a different question. In any event, it doesn't just affect Scotland; it also affects Scotland's relationship with the rest of the home nations. Why more powers for Scotland but not for any other home nation or region? Why should Scottish MPs still get to vote in Westminster on matters devolved to Scotland? The annoyance felt by people will only increase the more devolved powers Scotland gets.
Still don't see why that would bother people in England, who make up the vast majority. Wales or N. Ireland might feel aggrieved if they don't get the same powers as Scotland (which they should have), but England already has all the powers that Scotland would have - they just happen to be administered by the UK Parliament.
However I would be delighted to be proved wrong if there was huge public pressure for devolution for England or the regions after a NO vote. I'm all in favour of a fully federal system for the UK.
Still don't see why that would bother people in England
If you truly can't see why anyone would be bothered by the fact that MPs from one part of the UK have a say in Westminster on matters that don't affect their own constituents, but do affect the constituents of other parts of the UK, then I really do not know what I can do to enlighten you. The fact is that some people are bothered by it, which is why the "West Lothian question" persists.
England already has all the powers that Scotland would have - they just happen to be administered by the UK Parliament.
With non-English MPs able to vote on them. So it is not the same as having devolved English institutions with their own powers.
If you truly can't see why anyone would be bothered by the fact that MPs from one part of the UK have a say in Westminster on matters that don't affect their own constituents, but do affect the constituents of other parts of the UK, then I really do not know what I can do to enlighten you. The fact is that some people are bothered by it, which is why the "West Lothian question" persists.
I appreciate that there is concern about the WLQ, though I don't think it's a huge worry for most people. What I don't follow is why anyone in England would be bothered about giving Scotland more powers, which was the main point you were putting forward.
With non-English MPs able to vote on them. What part of that is hard to understand?
Not hard to understand at all. But the WLQ is a separate issue from giving Scotland more powers, though it would be a good idea to finally tackle the WLQ if there is going to be a bit of a shake-up.
I appreciate that there is concern about the WLQ, though I don't think it's a huge worry for most people. What I don't follow is why anyone in England would be bothered about giving Scotland more powers, which was the main point you were putting forward.
Not hard to understand at all. But the WLQ is a separate issue from giving Scotland more powers, though it would be a good idea to finally tackle the WLQ if there is going to be a bit of a shake-up.
It's not a separate issue. Devolution is the reason why the WLQ exists in the first place, and the extent of devolution has a direct impact on the scale of the WLQ. The more devolved powers Scotland has, the more instances you have of Scottish MPs voting on matters that don't affect Scotland, and the more acute the issue becomes. The greater the scale of the problem, the more people there will be south of the Border who believe that the problem is significant enough to feel aggrieved about it. So there's a direct relationship there.
Whether it's a "huge worry for most people" is a separate question, since that's more about perception than reality.
It's not a separate issue. Devolution is the reason why the WLQ exists in the first place, and the extent of devolution has a direct impact on the scale of the WLQ. The more devolved powers Scotland has, the more instances you have of Scottish MPs voting on matters that don't affect Scotland, and the more acute the issue becomes. The greater the scale of the problem, the more people there will be south of the Border who believe that the problem is significant enough to feel aggrieved about it. So there's a direct relationship there.
OK, I see what you're getting at now. Whether it will lead to greater awareness of the WLQ remains to be seen, but I actually hope it does.
SCOTTISH MPs could come to Tony Blair’s rescue after a survey revealed most are planning to vote on English university tuition fees.
Of the 57 Scottish MPs who responded to a survey for BBC Scotland’s Sunday Live show, 44 MPs indicated they would definitely vote on the issue - despite the fact the proposed top-up fees will only directly affect students in England and Wales.
The poll found the majority of Labour MPs will vote for the Government, swinging the question of tuition fees - one of the most serious divisions to threaten Tony Blair since 1997 - in the Prime Minister’s favour.
The vote has caused division among MPs because of the "West Lothian Question" - the issue of whether Scottish MPs should be allowed to vote on English matters.
Is the West Lothian question really a burning issue for most English voters? Wouldn't have thought so. Equally I doubt that most people would be all that bothered about giving Scotland more powers, as long as it doesn't mean Scotland receiving more money from Westminster than it currently does - which seems unlikely.
I'd bet that 99% of the population have never heard of the Barnett Formula or the West Lothian Question (and even fewer will remember who first asked it) but most people haven't a clue how this country is run and these questions only trouble us political anoraks. However, that doesn't mean that they aren't important issues.
Most people don't care as the current settlement has been stable for years so it hasn't been in the news. In the even of a major constitutional change then these matters would become more visible and get debated in public. Whether or not people would care then is unknown.
SCOTTISH MPs could come to Tony Blair’s rescue after a survey revealed most are planning to vote on English university tuition fees.
Of the 57 Scottish MPs who responded to a survey for BBC Scotland’s Sunday Live show, 44 MPs indicated they would definitely vote on the issue - despite the fact the proposed top-up fees will only directly affect students in England and Wales.
The poll found the majority of Labour MPs will vote for the Government, swinging the question of tuition fees - one of the most serious divisions to threaten Tony Blair since 1997 - in the Prime Minister’s favour.
The vote has caused division among MPs because of the "West Lothian Question" - the issue of whether Scottish MPs should be allowed to vote on English matters.
Of course it matters. It's just not at the top of most people's concerns and is mostly of interest to people like us who post on politics forums!
I'd bet that 99% of the population have never heard of the Barnett Formula or the West Lothian Question (and even fewer will remember who first asked it) but most people haven't a clue how this country is run and these questions only trouble us political anoraks. However, that doesn't mean that they aren't important issues.
Most people don't care as the current settlement has been stable for years so it hasn't been in the news. In the even of a major constitutional change then these matters would become more visible and get debated in public. Whether or not people would care then is unknown.
I'm ashamed to say I didn't care about the uni fees particularly at the time as both my kids were going through the system and wouldn't be affected. But I can now understand the resentment from those following on behind, which shows up regularly on DS in posts from people south of the border.
Incidentally, I wonder how much of a red herring free prescription charges is. Sadly I've just qualified thanks to a significant birthday but when I mentioned it in jest to the pharmacist, he said the vast majority of people in England don't pay for prescriptions anyway - when they need them most, they're either too old or too young to have to pay!
Incidentally, I wonder how much of a red herring free prescription charges is. Sadly I've just qualified thanks to a significant birthday but when I mentioned it in jest to the pharmacist, he said the vast majority of people in England don't pay for prescriptions anyway - when they need them most, they're either too old or too young to have to pay!
That's true. I posted a statistic last week that 88% of prescription in England are free (can't find the link now) and that the typical healthy person will only have one every few years so it's hardly a regular cost. Personally I haven't had a doctor's prescription in over 5 years. I'm sure it's a charge that people don't like paying but I'm sure it's way down the list of issues and that they'd rather something was done about NHS dental care.
The question needs to be asked of Better Together... If Scotland is doing so well in the in the UK, why is there such a huge brain drain of young people out of Scotland, to England and overseas? Why isn't there sufficient economic opportunities in Scotland to keep them there? A country where people of working age leave in droves is not one that is thriving as well as it could or should.
The exodus of talent would really begin if their is a Yes vote and the car crash economic proposals were to be started. It would reach Irish proportions.
The question needs to be asked of Better Together... If Scotland is doing so well in the in the UK, why is there such a huge brain drain of young people out of Scotland, to England and overseas? Why isn't there sufficient economic opportunities in Scotland to keep them there? A country where people of working age leave in droves is not one that is thriving as well as it could or should.
Same reason young people leave NZ for Australia and the UK. In search of adventure and more opportunities in bigger economies.
Speaking English, driving on the same side of the road, better weather and no midges might have something to do with it too
The question needs to be asked of Better Together... If Scotland is doing so well in the in the UK, why is there such a huge brain drain of young people out of Scotland, to England and overseas? Why isn't there sufficient economic opportunities in Scotland to keep them there? A country where people of working age leave in droves is not one that is thriving as well as it could or should.
It works like that throughout the UK English/Welsh.N Irish people move to Scotland for oportunities.
It isn't all one way traffic by any means.
Comments
The West Lothian question remains unresolved. That's why.
The Scottish Government doesn't use the powers it already has. They've never utilised the income tax powers for example.
Do you think the fact that the Scotland Act 2012 doesn't enact those income tax raising powers until 2016, might have some bearing on that?
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/news/news-calman.htm
No we already had limited tax raising powers, but the SNP let them lapse in 2007.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11792876
So................................we don't have Tax raising powers and therefore my post was correct.
The 3p variance was never really a viable option as the cost of implementing and maintaining it would have negated the upside of any revenue it would have generated. If they'd lowered the tax rate, the cost of implementation and maintenance would need to be counted as an additional loss of revenue.
TBH I don't live in Scotland now, being one of the hundreds of thousands of Scots who've moved to England due to work/family reasons that you so keenly denied a vote too. Not that I have any desire to move back after a Yes vote because I'm quite convinced the SNP plan is the road to economic and social disaster.
What I would say is if I could go back to 1997 I'd tell the young naive 18 year old me to vote No to both questions, because one day, you will massively regret the ugly genie you've let out of the lamp.
Is the West Lothian question really a burning issue for most English voters? Wouldn't have thought so. Equally I doubt that most people would be all that bothered about giving Scotland more powers, as long as it doesn't mean Scotland receiving more money from Westminster than it currently does - which seems unlikely.
Well now, that's a different question. In any event, it doesn't just affect Scotland; it also affects Scotland's relationship with the rest of the home nations. Why more powers for Scotland but not for any other home nation or region? Why should Scottish MPs still get to vote in Westminster on matters devolved to Scotland? The annoyance felt by people will only increase the more devolved powers Scotland gets.
Still don't see why that would bother people in England, who make up the vast majority. Wales or N. Ireland might feel aggrieved if they don't get the same powers as Scotland (which they should have), but England already has all the powers that Scotland would have - they just happen to be administered by the UK Parliament.
However I would be delighted to be proved wrong if there was huge public pressure for devolution for England or the regions after a NO vote. I'm all in favour of a fully federal system for the UK.
If you truly can't see why anyone would be bothered by the fact that MPs from one part of the UK have a say in Westminster on matters that don't affect their own constituents, but do affect the constituents of other parts of the UK, then I really do not know what I can do to enlighten you. The fact is that some people are bothered by it, which is why the "West Lothian question" persists.
With non-English MPs able to vote on them. So it is not the same as having devolved English institutions with their own powers.
Not hard to understand at all. But the WLQ is a separate issue from giving Scotland more powers, though it would be a good idea to finally tackle the WLQ if there is going to be a bit of a shake-up.
It's not a separate issue. Devolution is the reason why the WLQ exists in the first place, and the extent of devolution has a direct impact on the scale of the WLQ. The more devolved powers Scotland has, the more instances you have of Scottish MPs voting on matters that don't affect Scotland, and the more acute the issue becomes. The greater the scale of the problem, the more people there will be south of the Border who believe that the problem is significant enough to feel aggrieved about it. So there's a direct relationship there.
Whether it's a "huge worry for most people" is a separate question, since that's more about perception than reality.
From 2004
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-mps-to-swing-tuition-fees-vote-for-blair-1-920036
SCOTTISH MPs could come to Tony Blair’s rescue after a survey revealed most are planning to vote on English university tuition fees.
Of the 57 Scottish MPs who responded to a survey for BBC Scotland’s Sunday Live show, 44 MPs indicated they would definitely vote on the issue - despite the fact the proposed top-up fees will only directly affect students in England and Wales.
The poll found the majority of Labour MPs will vote for the Government, swinging the question of tuition fees - one of the most serious divisions to threaten Tony Blair since 1997 - in the Prime Minister’s favour.
The vote has caused division among MPs because of the "West Lothian Question" - the issue of whether Scottish MPs should be allowed to vote on English matters.
I'd bet that 99% of the population have never heard of the Barnett Formula or the West Lothian Question (and even fewer will remember who first asked it) but most people haven't a clue how this country is run and these questions only trouble us political anoraks. However, that doesn't mean that they aren't important issues.
Most people don't care as the current settlement has been stable for years so it hasn't been in the news. In the even of a major constitutional change then these matters would become more visible and get debated in public. Whether or not people would care then is unknown.
Of course it matters. It's just not at the top of most people's concerns and is mostly of interest to people like us who post on politics forums!
I'm ashamed to say I didn't care about the uni fees particularly at the time as both my kids were going through the system and wouldn't be affected. But I can now understand the resentment from those following on behind, which shows up regularly on DS in posts from people south of the border.
Incidentally, I wonder how much of a red herring free prescription charges is. Sadly I've just qualified thanks to a significant birthday but when I mentioned it in jest to the pharmacist, he said the vast majority of people in England don't pay for prescriptions anyway - when they need them most, they're either too old or too young to have to pay!
That's true. I posted a statistic last week that 88% of prescription in England are free (can't find the link now) and that the typical healthy person will only have one every few years so it's hardly a regular cost. Personally I haven't had a doctor's prescription in over 5 years. I'm sure it's a charge that people don't like paying but I'm sure it's way down the list of issues and that they'd rather something was done about NHS dental care.
The exodus of talent would really begin if their is a Yes vote and the car crash economic proposals were to be started. It would reach Irish proportions.
Same reason young people leave NZ for Australia and the UK. In search of adventure and more opportunities in bigger economies.
Speaking English, driving on the same side of the road, better weather and no midges might have something to do with it too
It works like that throughout the UK English/Welsh.N Irish people move to Scotland for oportunities.
It isn't all one way traffic by any means.