spending is higher because it costs much more to provide services to a rural population over a large geographical area, - which you do not factor into your "its not fair!" argument.
Housing ( for example) may be more expensive in some parts of London than the highlands of Scotand, but petrol and food prices ( for example) in rural Scotland are much more expensive.
Obviously service costs per head will be more in a less densely populated region, which compared with England, Scotland is.
You would have to have a big car and eat far too much if the cost of these equated to what you spend on your housing (social housing tenants excluded).
You would have to have a big car and eat far too much if the cost of these equated to what you spend on your housing (social housing tenants excluded).
I'm talking about the costs to service providers - ie council and government - how much it costs to run services, when petrol is more expensive, and more staff are needed to cover rural populations.
why did you mention housing prices then, if youre just going to shoot my point down, when I'm only pointing out that here, some cost of living essentials are very expensive yet wages much lower, and as you said London wages are higher.
eta - its a green paper - it's proposals, and this is only one of six. Another is a graduate tax - but apparently the Scottish government does not have enough fiscal autonomy to introduce such a tax, as its current powers stand.
Yes - equality of opportunity for all UK citizens! Not preferential treatment for a select few:D
After all we pay the same taxes - so why don't we get the same benefits?
What you have asked for is only now just happening in Scotland because of devolution and only now it is starting irritate the English masses. Prior to devolution we all suffered from a Westminster government that only listened to the views of the south east or middle England.
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all fought hard for devolution so that they finally had a government which understood and priorities their spending to benefit the area.
If many in England are unhappy about this then maybe instead of bleating about what they don't have get off their backsides and do something about it.
spending is higher because it costs much more to provide services to a rural population over a large geographical area, - which you do not factor into your "its not fair!" argument.
Housing ( for example) may be more expensive in some parts of London than the Scottish average, but petrol and food prices ( for example) in rural Scotland are much more expensive.
Obviously, service costs per head will be more in a less densely populated region, which compared with England, Scotland is.
I can understand that the provision of services to a rural population over a large geographical area merits a slightly larger location of money, but if you spend that money on free prescriptions and University education, you are not really helping the rural popluation.
I can understand that the provision of services to a rural population over a large geographical area merits a slightly larger location of money, but if you spend that money on free prescriptions and University education, you are not really helping the rural popluation.
Funny I would have thought that it would help all the population be it rural or urban.
Yes - equality of opportunity for all UK citizens! Not preferential treatment for a select few:D
After all we pay the same taxes - so why don't we get the same benefits?
Because too many of you are stupid enough to vote for whichever neoliberal party you think will make your mortgage cheaper, and public services are an afterthought?
I can understand that the provision of services to a rural population over a large geographical area merits a slightly larger location of money, but if you spend that money on free prescriptions and University education, you are not really helping the rural popluation.
That's you opinion, but its baseless since you don't live in Scotland (I assume) and haven't had a higher education here, so how you can assert that is beyond me.
Scotland has some of the best universities in Europe, I'm sure that most students who study at them disagree with your assertion that it doesn't help "rural population".
I don't object to Scotland offering free tuition fees - as long as Scottish taxpayers pay for 100% of the costs! If London kept all its tax revenues Boris could provide free tuition fees too.
That's you opinion, but its baseless since you don't live in Scotland (I assume) and haven't had a higher education here, so how you can assert that is beyond me.
Scotland has some of the best universities in Europe, I'm sure that most students who study at them disagree with your assertion that it doesn't help "rural population".
So, just because I don't live in Scotland, I should be denied an opinion?
I wasn't aware that the parents of Chinese students were paying taxes to the UK government which fund Scottish universities and free tuition for Scottish students - as Welsh and English parents are.:rolleyes:
We cannot carry on having a single UK tax system - and then have such huge differences in support for higher education. It is grossly perverse and unfair!
PS And don't say well that's what the English voted for. Most English people didn't vote Tory - and if we had PR for the UK parliament as the Scottish parliament does we would now have a Labour/LD government and no £9k tuition fees!
Who do you think owns a substantial portion of the UK debt, we are probably more indebted to the Chinese than anyone else, if anyone should get free university education in the UK it's probably the Chinese.
We don't have a single UK tax system, Council tax varies from council to council and band to band, Scotland is looking to gain tax varying powers to alter corporate tax rates and if they sort it out maybe income tax rates too, will you be so uptight if the Scots are paying a higher rate of IC than the English?
With a Labour led coalition we'd be at the beck and call of the IMF by now and god knows what fees would have to be then.
Who do you think owns a substantial portion of the UK debt, we are probably more indebted to the Chinese than anyone else, if anyone should get free university education in the UK it's probably the Chinese.
We don't have a single UK tax system, Council tax varies from council to council and band to band, Scotland is looking to gain tax varying powers to alter corporate tax rates and if they sort it out maybe income tax rates too, will you be so uptight if the Scots are paying a higher rate of IC than the English?
With a Labour led coalition we'd be at the beck and call of the IMF by now and god knows what fees would have to be then.
Very lively exchange on the Politics Show today - SNP bod accused of discriminating against English students - that didn't go down well
The Scots can do what they want with their money but I can't help thinking Westminster will want some revenge for this
If the Scots can think they can go it alone then fine. That would also mean that they receive NO funding from Westminster. If that was to happen University fees would be even more expensive than in England.
You would have to have a big car and eat far too much if the cost of these equated to what you spend on your housing (social housing tenants excluded).
Would you concede that due to variations in the cost of providing public services it's inevitable that the levels of public spending will vary across the country?
I think everyone is aware that there are different costs associated with different areas. The most obvious example of this is the extra cost involved in providing public services to rural areas. We can have general discussions about Scotland receiving less or more money than it should, but it doesn't make any sense to demand that every part of the country receives the same amount of public spending.
The Scots can do what they want with their money but I can't help thinking Westminster will want some revenge for this
It's really a reflection of what's happened in England. Fees prior to this development were always there for students from other parts of the UK, they were just lower than in England. With England raising fees I think it was always going to be likely that Scotland would do so as well.
Also, it should be stated that devolution is only part of this story. Scottish universities and their students are still part of UK wide funding systems. The bulk of research funding, for instance, still comes from the British research councils, so it's not as though Scottish universities are entirely independent of developments in the rest of the UK.
None of this answers the question of why English students are treated differently in Scotland from other EU students?
The UK - as a whole - is a single EU state, the agreement is there to help students from one state, to attend a university in another state. For that rule to apply, England and Scotland would have to essentially devolve further and become separate states, or the rules would need to be changed to allow the EU agreement to have power on a local level.
As mentioned on a previous post, it's a side effect of the devolution of the UK - we are in a transition process. What England really needs, is it's own parliament(s) - separate from the British government. There was an effort to do this during the Labour government but the public didn't want it.
As mentioned on a previous post, it's a side effect of the devolution of the UK - we are in a transition process. What England really needs, is it's own parliament(s) - separate from the British government. There was an effort to do this during the Labour government but the public didn't want it.
The English were never offered their own parliament. They offered regional parliaments - artifiicial regional areas which no one identifies with and never could.
The English were never offered their own parliament. They offered regional parliaments - artifiicial regional areas which no one identifies with and never could.
Well it was a step in the right direction, if need be, they could have merged them afterwards. Instead, the region most likely to want it, said nope.
Comments
Yes - equality of opportunity for all UK citizens! Not preferential treatment for a select few:D
After all we pay the same taxes - so why don't we get the same benefits?
You would have to have a big car and eat far too much if the cost of these equated to what you spend on your housing (social housing tenants excluded).
I'm talking about the costs to service providers - ie council and government - how much it costs to run services, when petrol is more expensive, and more staff are needed to cover rural populations.
why did you mention housing prices then, if youre just going to shoot my point down, when I'm only pointing out that here, some cost of living essentials are very expensive yet wages much lower, and as you said London wages are higher.
eta - its a green paper - it's proposals, and this is only one of six. Another is a graduate tax - but apparently the Scottish government does not have enough fiscal autonomy to introduce such a tax, as its current powers stand.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-12013392
What you have asked for is only now just happening in Scotland because of devolution and only now it is starting irritate the English masses. Prior to devolution we all suffered from a Westminster government that only listened to the views of the south east or middle England.
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all fought hard for devolution so that they finally had a government which understood and priorities their spending to benefit the area.
If many in England are unhappy about this then maybe instead of bleating about what they don't have get off their backsides and do something about it.
True, I too find it rather absurd that somebody from the EU can study here for free, yet Irish and English students for example still have to pay.
Surely it should be the other way around.
I can understand that the provision of services to a rural population over a large geographical area merits a slightly larger location of money, but if you spend that money on free prescriptions and University education, you are not really helping the rural popluation.
Funny I would have thought that it would help all the population be it rural or urban.
Because too many of you are stupid enough to vote for whichever neoliberal party you think will make your mortgage cheaper, and public services are an afterthought?
You miss the point. The money is supposed to specifically help those in rural areas.
That's you opinion, but its baseless since you don't live in Scotland (I assume) and haven't had a higher education here, so how you can assert that is beyond me.
Scotland has some of the best universities in Europe, I'm sure that most students who study at them disagree with your assertion that it doesn't help "rural population".
Boris has control over higher education policy?
Better tell Vince.
So, just because I don't live in Scotland, I should be denied an opinion?
No, just that your opinion doesn't actually matter.
Education budget is suppose to help education, area is irrelevant.
Who do you think owns a substantial portion of the UK debt, we are probably more indebted to the Chinese than anyone else, if anyone should get free university education in the UK it's probably the Chinese.
We don't have a single UK tax system, Council tax varies from council to council and band to band, Scotland is looking to gain tax varying powers to alter corporate tax rates and if they sort it out maybe income tax rates too, will you be so uptight if the Scots are paying a higher rate of IC than the English?
With a Labour led coalition we'd be at the beck and call of the IMF by now and god knows what fees would have to be then.
Ha, touché.
If the Scots can think they can go it alone then fine. That would also mean that they receive NO funding from Westminster. If that was to happen University fees would be even more expensive than in England.
Would you concede that due to variations in the cost of providing public services it's inevitable that the levels of public spending will vary across the country?
I think everyone is aware that there are different costs associated with different areas. The most obvious example of this is the extra cost involved in providing public services to rural areas. We can have general discussions about Scotland receiving less or more money than it should, but it doesn't make any sense to demand that every part of the country receives the same amount of public spending.
It's really a reflection of what's happened in England. Fees prior to this development were always there for students from other parts of the UK, they were just lower than in England. With England raising fees I think it was always going to be likely that Scotland would do so as well.
Also, it should be stated that devolution is only part of this story. Scottish universities and their students are still part of UK wide funding systems. The bulk of research funding, for instance, still comes from the British research councils, so it's not as though Scottish universities are entirely independent of developments in the rest of the UK.
As mentioned on a previous post, it's a side effect of the devolution of the UK - we are in a transition process. What England really needs, is it's own parliament(s) - separate from the British government. There was an effort to do this during the Labour government but the public didn't want it.
It's the Scottish Parliament who decide how much of their pot is spent on education. I guess they think that it's a good way of buying votes.
Why shouldn't London's Mayor have control of higher education in the capital?
London has more residents than either Scotland or Wales! Its also a world multi national multi racial entity
Or is it one 'home rule' for Scotland and another rule for everyone else.:D
The English were never offered their own parliament. They offered regional parliaments - artifiicial regional areas which no one identifies with and never could.