A flash of perspective
Professor Patrick Dunleavy of the London School of Economics, a man with absolutely no dog in the Scottish independence fight, has now published his detailed assessment of the set-up costs of an independent Scotland.
He puts the actual additional cost – that is, what Scotland would have to spend that it wouldn’t have to spend anyway if it stayed in the UK – at around £200m. That’s the total, not every year, and is somewhat below the UK government’s own “estimate” of £2.7bn, issued just three weeks ago to widespread derision.
For comparison purposes that’s very roughly what Scotland spends on the upkeep of Trident nuclear submarines every year (our share of the £2.24bn annual cost), but as the Unionist parties constantly complain that Scotland’s savings on Trident get spent several times over by Yes supporters, we thought we’d come up with an alternative.
The cost of just Phase 1 of the HS2 rail link between London and Birmingham is currently officially estimated at £21.4bn. Phase 1 will run for 140 miles. Scotland will have to contribute 8.4% of the cost, because it’s deemed that by speeding travel from London to Birmingham there’s a knock-on improvement in travel times further north, even though the HS2 line itself won’t go to Scotland for decades, if ever.
That comes to £1.8 billion, or about nine times Prof. Dunleavy’s estimate of the costs of creating the infrastructure of an entire new nation. With a No vote his £200m figure could, instead of paying for modern custom-designed bodies of Scottish government to replace the labyrinthine, inefficient legacy systems of the UK, build 1.43 miles of HS2, taking it from London Euston to, um, Chalk Farm tube station in Camden.
That journey currently takes roughly four minutes (and still will with HS2, as the train’s not going to be doing 200mph through central London). We’re certain that the people of England would be very grateful for Scotland’s contribution. It’s entirely up to Scottish voters which they think is a better use of their money.
Or, as someone Tweeted this morning, Manchester City’s wage bill is £202m.
I’m going with the set up costs of an independent Scotland.
Call me thrawn.
Or, if we’re using choo choo comparisons, less than one third of the £773 million spent on the Edinburgh Trams, thus roughly from the airport to Murrayfield. (That was not a scientific calculation…) Good value what?!
London spent £9Billion on a two week sporting event (Olympics)in 2012.
So spending £200Million setting up a new nation seems like a bargain to me.
You could have a flat in London for £140m.
link to theguardian.com
Plenty other comparisons I’m sure which make the set up of a ‘new’ Scotland look like chicken feed.
Manchester City FC’s yearly payroll is $202 million!
link to espnfc.com
Telegraph spin on it…
link to archive.today
HS2 isn’t even started and now HS3 is to come. We know (kinda roughly) what HS2 will cost Scotland (with no perceived benefit directly to Scotland) but what will HS3 cost us and will there still be no direct benefit to Scotland?
BTW – Scrap BBC Scotland and there’s your £200m plus another £125 million in change.
The Weirs lottery win was £161 million!
Nearly half a Labour UK ID card for every man woman and child in Scotland
40 million fish suppers
Scots raise 9.9% of taxation so our contribution will be more like £2.1bn. That’s over £1bn more than our ‘fair’ share.
We could pay for Phase 1 and set up 5 new countries with the loose change.
You could also upgrade some road junctions in London…
link to road.cc
Or buy a new polar vessel…
link to gcaptain.com
Not as much Lego as the UK Treasury first envisaged (13.5 times less it would seem).
Ignore all that rubbish – my brain suddenly thought I was Danny Alexander.
I’d imagine we’re lined up to pay 10% of the £400m for the last two so we could save £40m straight off by being independent.
And of course if we stay in the union we’ll be paying for the Westminster refurbishment, estimated at £3 billion.
How on earth to get this information into a place where Gary Robertson and Gillian Marles can read it.
Albert Herring says:
23 June, 2014 at 12:07 pm
Ignore all that rubbish – my brain suddenly thought I was Danny Alexander.
Don’t worry – your doctor will prescribe a pill for that.
Political capital will be made of that one-off circa £200 million set up cost, but putting it into context with what a major business would invest in a start-up and its nothing in relative terms. Even better – it will generate jobs for folk in Scotland, not the South.
link to nairnyes.wordpress.com
Last year’s UK government expenditure on other (non-HS2) ‘national infrastructure’ in, er, London was:
Underground upgrade etc: £1,231,000,000
Crossrail construction: £1,123,000,000
Thanks to the ‘pooling and sharing (sic)’ population-percentage-contribution-formula, Scotland’s taxpayer’s contributed well over £200 million to these projects which help the richest part of UK get richer.
Quite a bit of North Sea oil and gas revenues were probably thrown in the London-city-state infrastructure kitty too…
£200m? “I call that a bargain. The best I ever had…”
Seriously, that’s a price, well worth paying to lay the foundations of a new land fit for human beings to live happily in.
Or another way to calculate the cost of setting up an independent Scottish government.
£40 each.
You pay more for a good night out on the town.
Perhaps we should make up a list of what you can buy for £40.
HS3 rail is BBC headline news in lucky North link to bbc.co.uk
Complete news black out up above the North
link to bbc.co.uk
Pretty straight forward bettertogetherBBC brain washing day at the office really.
200 Million set up costs equates to 36 quid per head of population.
What is the annual subs costs for the Scotsman newspaper and which gives better value ? decisions, decisions
I say vote NO. Just think what we could all do in Central London with that extra 20 minutes we will have all thanks to HS2, rob a bank, steal a car, knock a coppers hat off (just like oor Wullie used to do with P.C.Murdoch.)
@Lesley-Anne
Do you think Oor Wullie has a bucket list ?
BTW badges on their way to you, let me know when the eagle has landed !
£200m will buy a 16th of a new aircraft carrier (£3.2bn each), or two F35B planes to put on it… link to bbc.co.uk
OR one library in Birmingham …
link to bbc.co.uk
Brilliant, Stu. So let us remember to tell everyone we meet today that for £200 million we can vote Yes for an independent country or vote No and give £200 million to the pooling and sharing pot and be proud of our wee 1.43 miles of HS2 in Central London.
I’m sure oor Wullie does have a bucket list Kendo but he’s keeping it under his bucket as he doesn’t have a hat to keep it under.
Will let you know when they arrive, I’m all in a tiswas waiting for them to arrive!
£200 million would pay for 1/31 of the Unionist cross-party Westminster welfare policy reform disaster-zone known as Universal Credit.
Obviously money well spent, otherwise it might have been wasted on feeding the poverty-stricken victims of Westminster’s neoliberal economic policies instead and there would be no need for foodbanks and then where would we be?
Universal Credit will cost taxpayers £12.8bn
Computer Weekly
03 June 2014
Noo am realy hivin a shitty day
NLC huvnae came to sort oot their balls up on fitting the new
kitchen cabinets.
Tv channel stuck on Fred MacCauley Bbc Scot
3 times Virgin media have checked the signal, box on/off
reset ( Change batteries in remote, they must think their
talkin tae a eijit ) they ur but dont tell them, 3 changes
of batteries later wan channel, cant change channel,or put
it on full screen.
But its no awe bad, keeked oota the back door tae see whit
awe the noise wiz ( across at the school ) the Queens Baton
on parade Sth Biggar Rd Airdrie 11.30, noo that really
made ma day,awe ah need noo is the Dippity Doo Dug Band.
From the Torygraph’s spin
“UK Government estimates that new computer systems to collect taxes and distribute benefits would cost £900 million “do not seem implausible”, he added.”
This must be based on th Westminster Government’s inability to hold down costs on what should have been relatively simple projects, like their new IT systems and Universal Credit.
As long as no one associated with the Edinburgh Tram project is associated with the setup phase we should be alright.
But there is just too much paperwork to fill out anyway says wee Willie Rennie.
I’d put in £40 to help get things going. Best deal of the century!
You read my mind. I wrote this on my facebook page yesterday but I also added the cost of nuclear power stations. 16 billion to build one and five are planned. Its a bit silly when Scotland exports electricity to have us fork out for them.
Peanuts compared to 2.7 billion
Millenium Dome, 700 million…
What’s the annual bill for the House of Lords?
Then again, it might be £200 million in Scottish pounds, but if there’s no currency union to ease the transition, it won’t be very long before £200 million in Scottish pounds is actually worth the same as £2.7 billion in pounds sterling.
And now Osbourne is revealing today plans for HS3 at an “estimated” £6-7bn which will span Manchester to Leeds. You honestly couldn’t make this stuff up, they haven’t even laid a yard of track for HS2 yet but its already deemed such a roaring success that they’re charging ahead with more of it…
And as for Patrick Dunleavy’s report – Andrew Kerr looked like he had to dig very, very deep to be able to announce the Professor’s findings on Sunday Politics yesterday, its almost as though he had a gun to his head forcing the words out…compare that with the absolute glee with which the BBC echoed Danny Alexander’s wild overestimate a couple of weeks ago, even after it had been rubbished by both the report’s authors.
That is why I will be outside Pacific Quay, making a lot of noise, hopefully with thousands of others on Sunday afternoon.
Our contribution to upgrade the London Sewage system, 336,000,000.
I think you forgot about this one beachthistle.
London is getting a new *ahem* super sewer at a cost of, wait for it folks, £4.2 Billion. So if my inaccurate mathematical calculations are correct we are *ahem* contributing £353 Million to this amazing *cough* necessary project. In this case setting up a new country for £200 Million is definitely a bargain price in my view.
link to bbc.co.uk
Mr. Osborne now thinking about discussing the possibility of HS3. No mention of Scotland, just “the North” and seemingly that means Manchester and Leeds both of which are already included in HS2. Seems Britain is getting smaller and time scales for the new focus on Scotland would appear to be well in the future. Any time within the next 300 years? Maybe, let’s discuss it.
Did you notice how BBC Reporting Scotland headlined yesterday with Prof. Dunleavy’s latest report? I paraphrase: “Shock Horror – Set up costs for independent Scotland to be – shocked expression – £200 million”.
Not: “Lying cheating UK goverment made to look ridiculous for misquoting the Prof’s original research and using it to come up with a gross over-estimate of set up costs of £2.7 billion”.
I know I shouldn’t be surprised at this sort of distortion any more from the BBC, but I still am.
Sorry for going O/T Rev.
The BBC youth debate at Glasgow Hydro is a chance in a million (IMHO). Boothman claims that he will negotiate with Yes Scotland as to who will represent YES. Given that the audience will consist entirely of 16/17 year olds, can we all start lobbying Blair Jenkins to field Saffron Dickson. The lassie is a star and would win hands down. She would have her peers eating out of her hand and voting YES.
Having had the pleasure of renovating a single UK government organisation that is not devolved, my view is £200m is a little on the low side but my estimate the total cost would be nowhere near £2700m. When doing these kind of estimates, it’s good to show a range figure (I have no idea why Prof Dunleavy did not do this) since using a range shows an element of uncertainty as well.
To show contract scale for projects with similar complexity and similar numbers of users: The london congestion charge contract (5yr pfi outsource, with all assets owned by outsourcer) was over £200m – that’s a system with plenty of IT and has a user base of about 5m.
A single building in Edinburgh cost £414m to build – so we’d have to house the new departments in existing and available office space as well. Much of which would not be secure enough for certain types of operation.
I’m quite looking forward to the challenge of building iScotland.
Just received my UK £720,000 anti independence propaganda booklet.
Can some please remind me of the Better Together Freepost details so that I can ensure this is deducted from their campaign expenses?
Gillie
I’ve spent at least 10 times that on bloody print cartridges and paper etc. if you add in donations / leaflets / petrol etc then it’s probably much more but who gives a shit.
If they think a trivial cost like that will put anyone off then they are crazy.
The savings on Commons/ Lords / Scottish office etc will easily cover this ” one off” cost. The savings will continue for every year.
Factor in Trident and other Defence savings and it would be a good deal at 10 times the estimate.
We should also remember a great deal of spend has no Barnett consequentials. 500 million pounds was spend upgrading the London sewers and that was deemed an extraordinary payment with no Barnett allocation. I.e. They spent money in London from our tax input at did not allocate 50 million to Scotland.
As far as Osborne is concerned and his *ahem* estimtes on the HS3 line lets just say in my view you’d need to double that figure of £7 Billion and then add a further 50% to the £14 Billion total to get a far more accurate final figure of £21 Billion. Westminster do NOT do accurate calculations they just pluck figures out of thin air!
The telegraph spin….shudder. This is our MSM at their finest. The comments section is equally nauseating.
Hope to see a large proportion of the money actually spent in Scotland too, we’ve loads of Scottish talent ready to unleash, so long as we can keep the troughers at bay, you know the ones I mean, ” let’s have a big launch party for the new website, we can invite one of the Royal’s along to open it”
@Ronnie, I’ll be at the banner relay in Coatbridge ( injured foot permitting). Got my saltire ready.
Looks like the british diplomats got the bash Scotland memo
link to thelocal.se
Our contribution to upgrade the London Sewage system, 336,000,000.
That’s about 50 quid a turd!
Subtract the LOSS to Scotland and NE England when HS2 is built
Economic output would be worst affected, according to the research, in:
Aberdeenshire, Aberdeen City and Moray (-£220m)
Norfolk East (-£164m)
Dundee and Angus (-£96m)
Cardiff (-£68m)
Norfolk West (-£56m)
link to bbc.co.uk
@ Another Union Dividend.
Better Together?FREEPOST RTAU-ZCRB-TELS?
5 Blythswood Square
?Glasgow?G2 4AD
£200 million is eleven and half times the amount the DWP lost in the last financial year due to its own departmental errors, inefficiencies and waste (£2.3 billion). This total, of course, doesn’t take into account the DWP’s vast waste of taxpayers money on Atos, Workfare, Universal Credit etc etc etc…and on and on.
2 The scale of fraud and error and the Government’s response
Hansard online
…£700 million was due to official error (0.4% of total benefits expenditure); £1.6 billion was due to claimant error (0.9%)…
If it’s 200 million or a gazillion billion trillion the point is…
the money will be spent IN SCOTLAND !
What is the cost of the National Grid Tunnels in London it is hidden in the web somewhere but I cannot find it but £62b seems likely can anyone find out?
Lesley-Anne – so that is £200m to do our own shit, or £353m to deal with London’s shit?
Alternatively, £200 Million gets you a stage extension at Pinewood studios. (part supported by the UK Gov.
link to in.reuters.com
Take from that what you will…
Hmm, think I phrased that poorly…
£200m would also get you a fully functioning tram that went from one end of Edinburgh’s Princes St to the other.
Craig P says:
Lesley-Anne – so that is £200m to do our own shit, or £353m to deal with London’s shit?
That’s about the size of it Craig.
One hell of a stink though for £353 Million don’t you think?
In terms of the budget of a country £200m is washers.
Hi folks,
I’m not trying to hijack this thread so apologies in advance if anyone is offended. But – any chance some of you kind people could repost this link on your Facebook or Twitter accounts to try and raise a wee bit of cash for the Yes Stirling campaign office?
link to igg.me
We’re still a wee bit short and your extraordinary generosity will make a difference as it has in the past for so many other similar worthy causes.
It is less than one twentieth of the pro-rata share of national debt interest payments for one year that Scotland will probably, voluntarily, take on.
Jim Duthie
Ive a feeling that the BBC’s idea of debate is questionable.
To have it in the Hydro with ‘up to’ 12,000 first time voters, is brave, but also equally questionable
Let me explain, I think debate, proper debate IS good, if its managed and both sides are afforded uninterrupted time to put their case over.
But having a debate in a venue more suited to rock concerts, is going to be difficult.
For example, how will someone at the back of the 12,000 audience get to ask a question and feel part of the debate?
I have the feeling that BBC Scotland are up to something with this, I could be wrong, but holding the attention of 12,000 in a venue that big, is going to be at best difficult.
Who ever does take part, will have to be stage presence savvy and I agree Saffron Dickson wold be ideal
I would re-establish an independent Scottish Stock Exchange. Multiple studies around the world shows this to promote economic growth.
link to en.wikipedia.org
Establish an independent country will not just be about costs – their will also be new revenues.
Capella says:
Subtract the LOSS to Scotland and NE England when HS2 is built. Economic output would be worst affected, according to the research, in: Aberdeenshire, Aberdeen City and Moray (-£220m)…
Excellent point.
Establishing & there! Rushing my lunch and cannot multi-task.
What I take from Osborne’s HS3 announcement is that GovUK has conceded the referendum and are switching tactics to keep the other British nations/regions from following us down that route.
Good Luck wi’ that, NOT.
@ Andrew
Sold a kidney..credited some pennies
Just a reminder about HS2 for those who missed it first time round. This project should always be poked with a stick at every opportunity. Here are the relevant links.
‘High Speed Rail Preparation Bill’
Well worth a quick read, as this report is scathing about the calculations. See especially the reduced services section (6)
The Beeb’s item about how phase 2 would ‘benefit’ Scotland. Although seems it now needs an HS3 just to get to Manchester.
Finally, “Wings” own article ‘The Trickle down effect’
link to archive.is
link to tinyurl.com
link to tinyurl.com
Murray McCallum – I remember the Edinburgh Stock Exchange in the 60s, though not sure when it went. It was in Nrth St Andrew’s St and had one of those glass sky walkways going between the buildings on either side of the St.
You would think that, with the future of the union at stake, HMG would at least guarantee a new high speed rail link to Scotland by 2030, if we vote NO in September of course. I would be a brilliant demonstration of union benefits, a potential game-changer. But no, they will not even promise this.
Why not?
Then again, it might be £200 million in Scottish pounds, but if there’s no currency union to ease the transition, it won’t be very long before £200 million in Scottish pounds is actually worth the same as £2.7 billion in pounds sterling.
Lmao, very true Breeks.
I had a thought though. If we are being generous to the UK government, maybe they calculated their figures in the old scots pound, with its former exchange rate of 10:1 sterling. Adds a whiff of truth through playing fast and loose with terminology, though I doubt the treasury mandarins are smart enough to come up with that.
“To have it in the Hydro with ‘up to’ 12,000 first time voters, is brave, but also equally questionable”
Its a means of forcing themselves deeper into the debate more than just on tv and the radio and we have to pay them to do it. It like a huge advert for BBC vote NO Scotland aimed directly at teenagers and if they dont want to go, get schools to bus them in.
Pretty sneaky/creepy but someone at Pacific Quay’s thinking a bit and leaching off Scotland’s democracy, as opposed to annihilating it all day in day out.
Wait wait wait wait wait. So not only is this a comparatively paltry £200 million, but this is without taking into account the savings made on defense, House of Lords, Trident, HS2, the London sewer system, Boris Island, and all the other money drains?
My God, I would jump at £200 million even if this was over and above the costs we already pay as part of the union – this is a bargain. How are people STILL not Yes!?!
Re debates. What is needed is a re-run of the “Great Debate” of 95 between coof Robertson and Alex Salmond. The “Lorraine Mann question” is still epic and worth listening to.
The audience there at that time wasnt huge but it was televised and it was , IMO, game changing.
Having just got back from the Clapton gig/fiasco at the Hydro, I am not at all sure about using it for a debate. If they do use it, I hope they do proper sound checks.
I also wonder what further additional benefits an independent Scottish Stock Exchange could offer if rUK were to leave the European Union?
I’m guessing that Professor Dunleavy is off Danny Alexander’s Christmas Card list (although I suspect that the Professor beat him to it following the Treasury mangling of his figures).
The young people’s debate show is just ridiculous. I think it’s a great thing that 16/17 year olds have the vote and are able to play a part in this – they should be able to. And one of the best things about it has been seeing some of the quality of young people out there, how intelligent and articulate they are.
But such shows should be just one small part of the whole things. However smart and articulate, 16 and 17 year old have no experience of adult life, and very little grasp of the times and events that brought us here. Thy won’t even remember the run up to the referendum for devolution, far less what went before.
And the BBC appears to be concentrating almost exclusively on youth debates. To fill the hydro with just 16/17 year olds and have that as the final, big televised debate is an offense to the whole of Scotland – it effectively excludes the vast majority of Scots, and the ones with life experience, and the age groups who should be helping to guide younger people.
Extremely shoddy and deliberately done by the BBC to create a one-sided debate that misses many of the really key points.
I won’t be watching if it goes ahead, whoever yes put up.
@Albert Herring says (23 June, 2014 at 12:04 pm) says:
“We could pay for Phase 1 and set up 5 new countries with the loose change.”
Like (-:
Brilliant …
I’m awfy confused.
Kezia Dugdale, in her first article for the Daily Comic, sorry Record criticizes the Scottish Government re plans to lower the rate of Corporation Tax but Gordon Brown did that and more when he was PM.
So that means that things are good when you’re in Government but bad when you’re in Opposition…..OK
Then in the same ‘paper’ there is uproar when the full impact of the austerity cuts become apparent but just yesterday New New Labour, the party Kezia loves so much announced they’re going to go even further.
The People of Scotland just need to ask themselves one question:-
If I used to earn £2000 per month, my mortgage was £800 per month, my luxury car and other non essentials came to £700 per month leaving £500 for food etc..
I have fallen on hard times and now only earn £1300 per month….Do I
a. Change my luxury car for something smaller and get rid of the non essentials but ensure I have enough food and money to pay my current mortgage
b….. Keep my luxury car etc…increase my mortgage to pay it off early …but have no money left to buy food.
If you chose a…. Welcome to YES.
If you chose b….Congratulations you’re either a raving lunatic, a Better Together/United with Britain’s answer to the Tea Party Supporter or both
Seemples Tsk
I see Professor Dunleavy’s report indicates that 22000 more civil servants will be required to control and administer the new departments which an Indy Scotland will require.
Scotland is currently short changed in public sector staff costs to an equivalent of 26,800 (full time equivalent) jobs.(We have 373,400, or 8.02% of the UK’s 4,657,000 (full time equivalent) public sector workers and they earn 3.16% below UK average).
So Scotland already pays for these jobs, but as they exist elsewhere we don’t get the economic or societal benefit.
I remember the Edinburgh Stock Exchange in Nrth St Andrew’s St. It had the first glass skywalkway I’d seen, which went from the Stock Exchange across to, not sure what, building was on the Nth side of St Andrew’s Sq. Don’t remember when it ceased to be.
How much did the Edinburgh Scottish Parliament building cost?
How much did the Edinburgh tram system cost?
How much did the Millennium Dome cost?
Well there you be, proud North British no voters, you are getting a new HS rail link from Manchester to Leeds, I’m sure that makes you very, very proud. We’ll just add it to your bill.
Sorry it’s just the bill your getting. Aye better the GITHER you give they take, ye canna whack it.
Making taxpayers in Scotland contribute to a useless train system that doesn’t reach Scotland is effectively theft.
This from 2012:
SNP MSP Joan McAlpine has asked the Prime Minister to explain why Scotland was cheated out of £400m Barnett Consequentials from the £4.1bn upgrade to the London sewerage network – saying this could fund vital infrastructure projects already snubbed by David Cameron.
Ms McAlpine has written to the PM following revelations the new sewerage system in London, as well as a £50 cut in water bills in the South West of England, will not be funded in the normal DEFRA way, which would have been entitled Scotland to some £400m in so called consequential payments due to the Barnett Formula.
The funding of London’s privatised water and sewerage system out of the UK government’s reserve funds means that there is no Barnett consequential. By-passing the usual funding process in this way means there will be no refund to Scotland for approximately £400m in Scottish taxpayers’ cash which will now be spent on improving the sewage treatment system in London and funding a cut in water bills for people in the South West of England
The thing missing in all of this is that not only is it a far lower cost than estimated by the unionist side but at the same time there will be an increase in efficiency resulting in reduced overheads and so a long term saving.
TJenny
The Scottish Stock Exchange (the merged Glasgow, Edinburgh, Dundee & Aberdeen Exchanges) were merged into the London Stock Exchange in 1973.
Looking at ‘Scotland’s Future’ I can see no inclusion of the potential economic benefit of the re-establishment of a Scottish Exchange.
It would be great if Glasgow could re-establish a proper Exchange and start down the road of being a commercial power once again.
The 2012 Olympics went around £6.4billion over budget from the initial estimate of £2.4billion made by the Labour Government when London won the bid in 2005.
If Scotland had to contribute 8.4% to the Olympics final bill of £8.77billion, then that would equate to £737million. How could anyone grudge £200million in national startup costs?
The new high speed train link, the Northern parts they MAY connect, will not be done until 2032-2033!.
Also, note Carlisle and Newcastle will not be linked in, that must isolate them more, can’t imagine they would be happy about it.
Anyway, it is immaterial really, as they will be bust before then!
The bulk of these set-up costs will be incurred while we are still part of the UK. These costs, by definition, are not devolved matters, and ScotGov will have no revenue stream for them until indy.
Therefore Westminster will have to pay, although admittedly they may well add the bill to our settlement.
Murray McCallum says:
I remember the stock exchange in Edinburgh, just off St Andrews Square. I was also thinking about that, and agree that a new country could find a reinstatement of that, a worthwhile exercise.
However, would need experts to give input ,in order to be state of art facility that would attract customers and businesses.
Murray McCallum. Thanks for that.
Funny they never thought of starting HS2 at Portree.
The wages for Man City were reported in dollars (most likely U.S)so that’s not really a comparison with the cost of setting us up. But when put in comparison with the cost of property in London, it’s a no brainer. It has to be a YES vote.
If we’re paying 8.4% of HS1 or whatever, do we get to choose which part of the line will be ours?
That would then belong to Scotland and we could charge transit fees for users of our line – should bring in a tidy amount…
Set up costs of about half of what we will have to pay as our sharre of the cost of refurbishing Westminster. And all of the money spent and recirculated in the Scottish economy. No brainer
@Les Wilson @Murray McCallum
link to cityam.com
Dcanmore
Thanks for the link. It’s good to see positive plans emerging from all the focus on costs.
Actually the “set up costs” are also a form of job creation. How many jobs would be created in Scotland by this 200 million or so?
How many jobs will be created in Scotland by any amount of Scottish money spent on a high speed train from London to Manchester?
frazer allan whyte – agree as every time I hear of the costs of setting up an indy Scotland, I only ever think of it as how many jobs that will be created, with their tax and spending being paid in Scotland for Scotland. Hooray.
Crivvens, is it just me or are the BBC rolling news’ reporters getting almost orgasmic about the announcement of HS3? And just statements eulogising it with nary a question on the viability or any investigation into the whys and wherefores of it at all.
@Cath
I agree that teenagers may not have the experience to demonstrate political wisdom, but you have to balance that against the fact that independence is a long-term proposition, and therefore far more important to people who won’t be dead soon than it is to people who will.
It’s not like we’re choosing a government for the next five years. We’re making a choice that is, to all intents and purposes, permanent, and I do think the people who will be most affected by that should have their say.
The Scottish Government and Glasgow City Council have agreed to underwrite the Organising Committee’s net running costs of staging the Commonwealth Games, which is currently budgeted at £523.6m.
This will be on the basis of an 80/20 split. It is expected that the majority of the 80% of costs to be covered by the Scottish Government will be new money committed to the sports and major events budget.
Other capital expenditure is taking place in addition to the Organising Committee’s budget, principally on venue infrastructure. Only three entirely new venues are required to stage the games, which are budgeted at a combined total of £200 million and additions to existing venues will cost an additional £70 million, although most of this investment had been planned to take place regardless of the bid result.
The Games Village is projected to cost some £229 million and will be developed through a Public Private Partnership scheme.
200 million could buy two F35B planes, one for each of the aircraft carriers.
Edinburgh trams 700 million,and they forgot the airconditioning!(talk about sweaty!)
Even if setting up an independent country cost 900 million I would be happy,peanuts really.
Having posted a link to the Rev’s article on my Facebook feed, I’m now being asked the validity of the 1.43 miles figure quoted… In that 8.4% of 140 miles is 11.76 miles.
While I realise that the figures themselves are arbitrary in the big scheme of things, it would be helpful to be able to point folk at how the 1.43 miles figure was attained.
Any clarification would be appreciated.
“Having posted a link to the Rev’s article on my Facebook feed, I’m now being asked the validity of the 1.43 miles figure quoted… In that 8.4% of 140 miles is 11.76 miles.”
Why am I not surprised that Unionists on Facebook struggle to grasp simple concepts and arithmetic?
8.4% of 140 miles is indeed 11.76 miles. But £200m – the sum of money we’re talking about here, it being the cost of setting up an independent Scotland – wouldn’t pay for 8.4% of HS2 Phase 1. You’d need about £1.8bn for that. £200m will pay for 1.43 miles.
40 Billion to upgrade London underground
we currently pay £50m a year to Westminster to defray running costs, £250m per parliamentary term or say £800m since devolution.
So in fact we could be £50m up in the first term of an independent Scottish government.
Add to that the £200m a year we subsidise UK central govt spending for every year, and that equates to a further £100m per term(10% of £1000m)
This independence seems like a bargain, why haven’t we done this much earlier?
£200m? You could get four West Coast rail franchise debacles for that.
And here is a job on another London project should you be so inclined….
Employee Relations Assurance Manager
Paddington, London
Full/Part Time
Competitive salary commensurate with skills and experience
Would you like the opportunity to be part of a ground breaking project, which will have an impact on the environment and the lives of Londoners for years to come?
The proposed Thames Tideway Tunnel (TTT) is a major new sewer, urgently needed to help substantially reduce the volume of untreated sewage currently discharged into the tidal River Thames from London’s Victorian sewage system and protect the river from increasing pollution for at least the next 100 years. Running from Acton in the west through to Abbey Mills Pumping Station in east London, the proposed tunnel would capture overflows from 34 of the most polluting combined sewage overflows in London. The captured sewage would then be transferred to Beckton Sewage Treatment Works, via the Lee Tunnel, for treatment.
The main Tunnel will be approximately 25km long, and broadly follow the route of the River Thames, with 24 construction sites, affecting 14 London boroughs. The entire project is expected to take between 6 and 7 years to complete and cost £4.2 billion (2011 prices excluding inflation)
When I heard the 200million figure, to put it in context, that wouldn’t even buy 2 Velodromes for the Commonwealth Games (it cost £110 mil).
…then to consider saving on Trident, basically the set up costs for Independence are a saving… an investment for the future… Feck, you would think the Tory’s would even be in support.
We could give westminster a week to remove the trident subs then sell them for scrap if they are still there on day 8.
Doubt we would even need to haggle the price to reach 200 million.
200 million is also 4 years drink/food bill for westminster.
That would provide some braw stocked food banks in year 5…
Even if it actually WAS £2.7 billion, it would still be a bargain in all honesty, how much per year over the next voting generation ?
Peanuts, especially compared to what Scotland will save fromTrident and HS2 and 3(aye ok) alone.
How much did Scotland have to contribute to upgrade London’s sewers?
And that was not even the REAL sewer, the House of Vermins.
Stuart Black,
“Our contribution to upgrade the London Sewage system, 336,000,000.”
Sorry, posted before reading your comment.
136 million pounds less than the PULLING of resources FROM Scotland to upgrade London’s sewers to build a new modern nation.
Salmond to meet Darling in a head to head
“smoke me a Ukipper before breakfast Darling”
snigger
Anyone asked what it will cost to upgrade the UK IT systems (and they will need to be done)? Scotland will have to pay it’s share of that if we vote NO. Guaranteed to cost more than the £200m of setting up our own country
I believe Scotland’s share of Westminster running costs is about £50million per year.
Therefore on completion of the first full Westminster term after Independence we will be showing an admin surplus of £50m.
Thanks for the clarification Stuart – have posted this at the end of the lively comments currently appearing on my Facebook feed – so far all very civilised, and hopefully your contribution on the exact nature of the figures will help keep things moving along!
I knew this site was biased but to completely fall to even mention the £900m IT. Investment which prof Dunleavy’s tacitly accepts — or the “several hundreds of millions” of IT investment he speaks about — is poor even by the “standards” of this site.
Prof Dunleavy identifies over £1bn of one-off costs including IT spend required — he excludes it in the £200m sub-total to spare Alex Salmond’s blushes and – SNP poodle that you are – you regurgitate that figure as if it is comparable to the treasury numbers.
If you check the treasury press release you’ll see you’ve tintentionally, obviously) misrepresented the £2.7bn figure. I detailed this at the time here > link to chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk
You are seekers of truth I know so I’m sure you will correct the piece above and mention the IT costs not include in the headline figure.
“I knew this site was biased but to completely fall to even mention the £900m IT. Investment which prof Dunleavy’s tacitly accepts — or the “several hundreds of millions” of IT investment he speaks about — is poor even by the “standards” of this site.”
Oh do shush. If you’re not actually going to read Prof. Dunleavy’s report, as you clearly haven’t, don’t come here honking until you have. We’re going to have to pay IT costs even if we stay in the UK, as the UK’s IT systems are all due for upgrading soon and are horribly complex and unwieldy, and creating a new, efficient system from scratch provides lots of opportunities for improvements and savings. The good Professor notes that such expenditure should be seen more as an investment than a cost.
Since he has no conceivable interest in bigging up the SNP and I’ve never even voted for them, use terms like “SNP poodle” again and you can just fuck off without any further warnings.
Isn’t it a crying shame when the truth gets in the way of politics.
I agree up to a point with you regarding the costs of implementation but surely you must realise that it’s virtually impossible to cost something when said cost will be determined by negotiation on shared software.
As has been discussed ad nauseum the costs will be vastly overshadowed by the savings..HS2/3….Trident….Westminster Refurbishment et al
Annual cost of House of Lords is £90 million!
Its hard not to laugh whenever you see someone on the no side implode and resort to name calling
Consider an edit folks, it says “with a No vote” money will be spent in Scotland. It always needs to be clear that YES is the only way to protect Scotlands services! Otherwise people will be ticking the wrong box in September!!
Another London based vanity project for only £175 million!
link to theguardian.com