The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

The news we knew

Posted on October 02, 2013 by

We’re not quite sure why the UK government has chosen this year, of all years, to start disaggregating tax receipts by nation, breaking down the UK’s income according to how much of it came from each of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and even calculating oil revenues on a geographical basis.


You might well imagine that such an exercise could only serve to provide fuel for the independence movement, and the initial release of figures (probably the only one before the referendum) certainly seem to confirm that impression.

The graph above looks pretty, but it’s not particularly useful as far as we can tell. The more important one has less visual impact, but tells a much more detailed story.


That’s an account of the funds delivered to the UK Treasury from the four corners of the Union in the 14 years since devolution, and despite the No campaign’s constant dire warnings about the “volatility” of oil, the numbers are remarkably consistent. In each of the last 13 years, Scotland has produced more than its fair share of the UK’s wealth.

With 8.4% of the UK population, Scotland has on average been responsible for 9.12% of Britain’s tax revenues. That’s 109% of what would be our fair share per head of population. Over the same period, the people of England have on average produced 102% of their share, Northern Ireland 87% and Wales just 73%.

It is, then, clear beyond any reasonable doubt in which direction subsidies flow within the UK. Scots out-produce anyone else and generate wealth significantly out of proportion to Scotland’s size. To put some meat on those bones, here are the year-by-year figures for the amount Scotland contributed over and above its population share:

1999-00: -£312m
2000-01: £716m
2001-02: £1.32 bn
2002-03: £1.47 bn
2003-04: £1.14 bn
2004-05: £1.3 bn
2005-06: £4.23 bn
2006-07: £3.93 bn
2007-08: £3.44 bn
2008-09: £7.93 bn
2009-10: £3.19 bn
2010-11: £4.67 bn
2011-12: £6.48 bn
2012-13: £2.95 bn

TOTAL: £42.5 bn

It is, of course, too much to hope that these figures will put an end to the “subsidy junkies” myth. But it’s nice to be able to say definitively what they are.

Print Friendly

    188 to “The news we knew”

    1. Dinnatouch says:

      Is this an admission that Scotland is already lost, but a warning to Wales not to pull the same stunt?

    2. les wilson says:

      Strange they have done this, call me a cynic but does that include income from the oil extracted from the 6,000 sq miles of the North Sea stolen in 1999, and put in the English account?
      Beside this, I suppose the MSM will say it shows we are better together,er somehow !

    3. I submitted a petition to our Senedd calling for a GERW report (like your GERS) and the Labour finance minister kept fobbing it off. The last reason she had for fobbing it off was the fact that this report was due out.

      All this shows me is that we are being deliberately weakened by the Red Tory poverty mongers.

    4. kininvie says:

      Those figures of what we contribute are awfy volatile….

    5. Andy A says:

      What’s the betting that £42.5 billion will now become the favourite cash sum to quote by the YES campaign.  And the chart shown does put Darling’s claims of tax volatility in perspective – who wouldn’t want volatility like that ? 

    6. PRJ says:

      This obviously does count taxes that woud be transfered from England after independence due to relocation of services. Or by buisness that pay tax in England but also operate in Scotland. 

    7. As you say, Stuart, its nothing we didn’t know already.

      BTW, can anyone get the links in the ‘Commentary on Receipts’ section of the pdf to work? Every time I click on one, it just takes me back to the start of the document?

    8. Eddie says:

       More fuel to the fire of independence, splendid.

    9. jim mitchell says:

      Hopeless at maths, not to mention lazy, anyone care to work out an average amount based on these figures?

    10. The_Duke says:

      Can’t wait to see Douglas Fraser giving this a full break down and analysis.
      I would be willing to put my house on this not being mentioned!

    11. jim mitchell says:

      I of course meant annual average.

    12. Inbhir Anainn says:

      @les Wilson
      Is it not the case that the UK government had created a new country named Extra Regio Territories in order to conceal the oil revenues from the Scottish account.

    13. Lanarkist says:

      Gosh, since the beginning of the crash in 2008 we seem to have been performing quite well and paying our way quite handsomely. However according to the Institute of Fiscal Studies report reported by Sev Carrol in the Guardian states that, how ever we look at it, any options we choose, creating oil fund, being independent, managing our own natural resources etc. would cost us 3.4 billion or reduce spending plans by 3.4 billion. Or we could vote to share the pain and endure a rise in debt between now and 2017 of a measly 45 billion give or take.

      imagine having the opportunity to actually see what the true, real, unadulterated figures might be in a re-energised Scottish economy using all the fiscal and economic levers available to any other nation. The projections given are based on performances seemingly achievable whilst hopping blindfold up stairs, hands tied behind back balancing baby elephants on our shoulders.

      It seems that the disjointed nature of BT results in their pet reports cancelling out their grand pessimistic claims. The right hand does not know what the left hand is doing.

      Carry on.

    14. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      Hopeless at maths, not to mention lazy, anyone care to work out an average amount based on these figures?”

      Wow, that IS lazy. £3bn.

    15. Big Al says:

      Rev, do you know if this takes account of the anomaly of Whisky exports dispatched from English ports and thus counted as English revenue?

    16. beachthistle says:

      I agree that these  figures look healthy for Scotland, and all point to supporting Yes. However I don’t think they tell the full/true story of how much Scotland/the Scottish economy provides to UK revenues.
      For instance, Customs Duties. As far as I am aware and have experienced, Customs Duties are paid to the country at point of shipping/export, not of production/manufacture. If true a large proportion of Customs Duties from whisky exports will be recorded as being generated in England, not Scotland. I have asked HMRC for clarification about this:

      Subject: Customs Duties disaggregated by country (England, Scotland, N.Ireland., Wales)
      Question: Is it possible to clarify/show Customs Duties for the country in which the goods involved are primarily/initially produced/manufactured – and not, as I suspect the case is now, recorded regarding the country they are ultimately shipped/exported from?
      I also put link to the disaggregated HMRC figures on twitter earlier today: one response was:
      “Scottish supermarket VAT still attributed to Head Offices in England are a substantial revenue source too.”

    17. Craig P says:

      interesting stats!
      It’s almost as if the Tories secretly want to help us.

    18. jim mitchell says:

      Rev many thanks, I will now get back to organising the distribution of the 1200 YES newspapers that are at present sitting in my hallway. lol

    19. Gordon Smith says:

      Hold on , hold on . hold on, This is offshore revenues and offshore corporation tax, so how if, geographical share (territorial waters??) , England gets the major chunk ? Or I am missing something?
      Please explain, as if this is accepted after Indy , we would only appear to get 8% than our present population share???

    20. Big Al says:

      And another thought: this information will likely not be a true representation of tax available should it be correctly collected from the massive tax dodgers out there.

    21. Tony Little says:

      Does it include VAT properly allocated, or Corporation Tax similarly, or fines, or other taxes and revenues generated in Scotland?  The GERS only tells a part of the story.  This document tells a bit more (it seems to me, although I have not tried to do a comparison of the figures between GERS and here).  So to my mind, and unless I am well off the mark, iScotland would be even better off
      Or am I missing something? 

      OK ignore this, I will read through the document more fully. Perhaps it answers my question!

    22. Murray McCallum says:

      HMR&C – yet another front for the SNP!

    23. Tony Little says:

      Ah.  Erm, no it doesn’t.  I tried to use the links for VAT etc. but get nothing – just back to the first page.  So maybe the individual sources are not yet available online?  Still, it’s a start for more information.

    24. MajorBloodnok says:

      And they might be doing it deliberately.

    25. Jock McDonnell says:

      but if they are doing it deliberately, surely ruthie n rennie must have heard – but they just keep on painting themselves into a corner, i’m not stopping til 19th September

    26. Gallowglass says:

      Excellent stuff.  No, really.  It stops the petulant attacks on GERS and there never wad reason to obscure tax accounting.

    27. Indy_Scot says:

      Having seen David Cameron on TV over the past couple of days it seems clear to me that he wants an out right Tory victory in 2015 and that he would probably be more than happy to see Scotland Independent with Labour losing 40 or so MPs while laying the blame on Alistair Darling.
      I think he is distancing himself from any involvement in the referendum for his own gain.

    28. Tony Little says:

      Thanks cH
      from the VAT section “These statistics are drawn from VAT returns submitted to HMRC, and cover the United Kingdom. It is not possible to provide any geographic breakdown on where tax liability arose for VAT as HMRC does not collect this data on the VAT return. HMRC does not publish any geographic breakdown on VAT by taxpayer registered address as this is not related to where the tax liability arose.”
      So, no help there then!  I have to go out, but will take a look at the figures when I can.  However, I suspect I will hit a number of dead ends!  Ruth Davidson wants figures.  Tell the Treasury to open the books and get the information PROPERLY appropriated. 

    29. Boorach says:

      I trust that someone will bring this to the attention of one Simon Heffer Esq! 🙂

    30. Boorach says:

      I trust that someone will bring this to the attention of one Simon Heffer Esq! 

    31. tartanpigsy says:

      O/T but I’ve noticed The Common Weal’s fundraiser is in need of some momentum. It has 3 weeks left to run and is sitting at about a third of it’s £25K total.
      Wings with it’s fluent interractive format lends itself perfectly to crowdfunding.
      I’m not quite sure how, but it would be useful if the active readership/ posters here could help mentor, by means of social media plugging, other important parts of the greater campaign to meet their required financial goals.

    32. seoc says:

      Doesn’t all fines in Courts of Law go directly to the Treasury?

    33. Simon says:

      “Chart 3 shows that if offshore Corporation Tax and Petroleum Revenue Tax receipts are included using on a population
      basis then the situation is very similar to that where offshore Corporation Tax and Petroleum Revenue Tax are excluded.”

      So they seem to think it is reasonable to analyse oil revenues on a “population basis” rather than a “geographical basis”.

      Curious. Why would one want to do such a thing?

    34. tartanpigsy says:

      Bugger, edit lost, also meant to add that all of us when we are active online should be pushing articles from all sites that help our cause, just because you don’t agree with Newsnet’s moderation policy shouldn’t mean their articles are tweeted or shared less.
       … right carry on

    35. Tony Little says:

      Yes I believe so.

    36. les wilson says:

      Inbhir Anainn

      I knew they created a separate account, I did not know the name. However what I have read about  the 6t,000 sq miles is that if Scotland excuse me WHEN, becomes independent, this theft would be illegal, according to International law.
      if that were the case then taxes from that area would then be added to the Scottish account. So how much more would that be?


    37. Keef says:

      Shit like this bores me.
      Whilst I realise it helps dispel the myth of ‘subsidy junky’ it as after all quite irrelevent as all the money raised from ‘hidden’ factors will show it’s Scotland’s water, whisky, oil and food that keeps the UK’s balance of payments looking reasonable.
      Forget the rest, when those revenues are taken out of the equasion and the true income to Scotland includes the ‘crown’ estates revenue, then Scotland is worth and making a mozza.

    38. les wilson says:

      I wish we could get the truth about the whole amount Scotland pays in, all revenue streams. I think we may be surprised, and realise just  why they are so evasive.

    39. Casrle Rock says:

      As a nation why do we send all our money to another nation and then accept pocket money back in return?
      We have been lied to, smeared, belittled and talked down to for decades – and that’s just from the “Scottish” Labour Party. 
      Throw in the abuse from the likes of the Telegraph, Daily Mail, the BBC, UKIP, Conservative supporters and even our own Scotsman newspaper and its no wonder why some people question whether we can be an independent nation.
      Ask any other nation in the world if they would be prepared to give all their money to their neighbour and get sweeties back in return and they’ll run you out the door.
      Ask any other nation if they would accept being taught another nations history instead of their own and they will think you are mad.
      Ask any other nation whether they would accept housing nuclear weapons 35 miles from the centre of their biggest city and they would look at you with distain for not have any balls or respect for your own country.
      Ask any other nation if they would accept having policies inflicted upon them that they didn’t vote for and they will say “we don’t believe you, you cant be that sad or lacking in pride”
      Ask any other nation whether they would accept the constant smearing…
      The list goes on and on.
      If we don’t vote YES on the 18th September 2014 then we don’t deserve to be called a nation, pretendy or otherwise, and we’ll end up being the laughing stock of the world.
      I hope we grow some.

    40. The_Duke says:

      We’re not quite sure why the UK government has chosen this year, of all years,
      Yet another piece of the puzzle in Scottish_Skiers theory!

    41. Chic McGregor says:

      The fixation on oil really pisses me off, problem is the other facts are harder to get over to the people.
      Top two being.
      1.  Even with no oil revenue whatsoever, Scotland’s GDP per capitaeven based on UK Government figures is almost exactly the same as the rUK.
      2.  The repatriation of value added for Scottish food and drink produce exports will inevitably, post independence, be more than oil revenue and not volatile (beyond normal year to year climatic variance).

    42. Paul says:

      Given that 8.4% is based on the 2011 census, that comparison won’t be totally valid for historic years – worth finding out how that percentage share of population has changed over the years?

    43. Dcanmore says:

      Just wondering if these figures include income generated by the Crown Estates in Scotland? That’s a good point about Custom Duties being paid in England, maybe that’s why Scotland has very little import/export handling facilities.
      In fact there needs to be a long hard look at what sort of income Scotland could be generating if it is an independent country now and not relying on hubs based in English ports and and airports. Scotland really is poverty stricken when it comes to income generating infrastructure, even the Goliath cranes fitted at Rosyth, for the assembling of the new carriers, had to come from Sweden. 

    44. HandandShrimp says:

      I agree, Scotland has an economy as diverse and as strong as the rest of the UK. Even without oil we would be OK. Oil is just the icing on the cake, something we can use to ensure that we develop and grow our country. It is important that people realise we do have a robust economy and that we are not some mono-product dependent exporter subject to the vagaries of that commodity’s market price.
      That said, these are an interesting if unsurprising sets of statistics. Like others I wonder what the reasoning is behind the Treasury letting these loose.

    45. JLT says:

      There is no doubting this …the Tories want rid of Scotland. It has to be the reason for the release of such information.
      Cameron made his speech today, where he basically told his Tory hordes that Miliband was the threat, and therefore he needs to be beaten, and beaten badly.
      At the same time, the Daily Mail is at war with Miliband over the slandering and allegations of his fathers attitude towards Britain.
      No matter if Miliband does get an apology from the Mail, that paper will be gunning for Ed with an absolute passion in the future. They will be relentless, and they will not let up. If Ed becomes a dead man walking, then I think eventually, all the major tabloids will go out to slaughter him. They are going to paint him so red, that you think Cameron was about to go up against Joseph Stalin. The English nation will respond. They will humiliate Miliband, and vote the Tories back into power.  
      And if the Tories are prepared to lose Scotland, then what better way to give Ed another nightmare than for Labour to be setup and slaughtered in Scotland. By releasing figures that prove that the Scots pay more than their fair share, and have done so for many, many years (and during the years that Labour were in power), then this could be explosive! If this information becomes common knowledge to the Scottish public, then there could be a massive swing to the ‘Yes’ vote.
      Labour will therefore be treated with such deep suspicion and contempt, Plus …and let’s be honest here …Ed is vilified in Scotland. He’s up there with Farage!). So, the worst nightmare comes to pass, and Miliband loses his 50 keys seats in Scotland as he watches that nation votes itself into Independence.
      If this has been the Tory plan for the last couple of years, then it’s been an absolute  belter! You never mess with the establishment!!
      This could see the end of Labour as it stands. Shattered and split over 2 nations. UKIP sits in the wings of English politics, and hey, they are so right-winged, that to any Tory supporter, they now have two choices! If need be, the Tory faithful will demand for a UKIP – Tory coalition if it means dominating Parliament. This leaves England with successive right wing governments for the far foreseeable future.
      Then we come to what I believe maybe what the Tories truly want, and it is the crunch moment for England.
      If the English people are daft enough to vote themselves out of Europe, then it would be like Turkeys voting for Christmas. The English nation can kiss all protection such as Working Directive, TUPE, and contractual obligations all goodbye. Workers may find new laws being passed that waters down working contracts, or see contracts torn up. Wages will be driven downwards. Immigrants may find it harder to get work, or even permission to stay in the rUK.
      And the reason for all of this …Cameron wants to compete with the BRIC nations …this is the only way he can do it. He needs ‘slave’ labour, low wages, no unions, and long hours if the rUK is going to compete with these new emerging markets.
      By shattering Labour, who is really left to oppose the Tory masterplan?
      So, by offering Scotland its unique chance to gain independence, they could break Labour, and socialism altogether. Being out of Europe will also allow the Banks to do avoid any European regulations, and thus, continue to do ‘casino’ banking.
      I don’t know if I’m wrong here, but it makes me wonder just how far the Tories would really go.

    46. John D says:

      Aye we are rolling in it, that is why they want us to stay. Well right up their proverbial, too long they have partied on our money.

    47. Doug Daniel says:

      These figures simply serve to prove just how volatile the Scottish economy is. Some years we outperform the rest of the UK slightly, other years we shite on it from a great height!

    48. ianbrotherhood says:

      Just got back from Glasgow, the RIC Shawlands debate. I thought it started at 7.30, got there 15 mins early, but wasn’t allowed in – it was already packed. 
      No matter – got to see KG (who was at the Horseshoe a few weeks ago) and finally met Albalha! A real pleasure. Credit to them both and everyone else involved – only prob? The venue clearly wasn’t big enough – the doorman told me he’d already knocked back about 20 folk before me, and he had to knock back twice that number (at least) as I sat there chatting to K and Albalha. 
      Made meself scarce after an hour or so as I felt I was getting in the way, then got home to find an impressively-produced full-colour 8-page ‘Yes’ newspaper (including a cartoon by Malky McCormick) on the doormat.
      All-in-all, a braw evening, so: to Albalha, Kevin, and all the other splendid people I met tonight – gaun yersels, and bottoms-up!

    49. Macandroid says:

      “Oil is just the icing on the cake” paints a very odd picture for me. I do agree though that a full set of accounts would be very enlightening. 

    50. Wee_monsieur says:

      Only £42.5bn? Nae enough… we’re doomed!

    51. Erchie says:

      I posted the time on the other thread! Typed up the whole leaflet
      We thought about going, but decided to leave spaces for those that need persuading

      If they could get the Langside Halls, I’d be intgerested in going

    52. benarmine says:

      And you better believe the actual figures would look a lot better than this. Thanks for the help HMRC. Ruthie just crashed and burned on Scotland Tonight on the subject of further powers. Jam sometime, maybe, no idea what flavour.

    53. john mcguire says:

      keep in mind that Westminster changed the territorial waters line norther from (say) about Newcastle that landed more oil and gas revenues into English accounting. So our Scottish numbers are understated. 

    54. creag an tuirc says:

      Aye, that’s if they are really telling us the truth (cough, cough, McCrone report) Sea bed theft, extra regio territories and North Sea generated taxes accrued to London companies.

    55. Bill C says:

      o/t  a wee bit, sorry Stu, but I can’t help myself.  Just witnessed Ruth Davidson having a car crash of an interview on Scotland Tonight. Totally hung out to dry by Cameron she even said that “David Cameron was backing her on this” i.e revealing new devolution powers before the referendum. Rona Dougall gently reminded her that Cameron had already said no discussions before the referendum. Comedy gold.  Scottish Skier’s theory grows more credible by the day!

    56. ianbrotherhood says:

      Were you told 7.00?
      Unfortunately, the Glad Cafe’s in-house promo flyer said ‘8.00’. No wonder there was confusion. However, as I said to Albalha earlier, we have to expect these hiccups – these events are being organised by volunteers who, for the most part, have busy lives same as the rest of us, and we’re in new territory here. It’s not like a run-of-the mill ‘political’ meeting where latecomers are normally welcomed with open arms if for no other reason than to provide some extra body-heat for the half-dozen poor sowels who accidentally wandered in to what they thought was an AA meeting.
      It’s all good – the atmosphere tonight in the place was very similar to Edinburgh week-end before last – total strangers smiling at each other, no tension of any kind. Mind you, I didn’t hear any of the debates. I did, however, hear sporadic bursts of applause. No doubt Albalha will point us to full details in due course, and I’m assured it was all being recorded, nay streamed.

    57. Keef says:

      @ JLT
      I love your summation.
      Add to this if -and that’s a massive ‘if’. If Scotland were to vote no, then the backlash on Labour in Scotland would be horrendous. They would be be gonski for another generation. However, it would only leave the SNP to stave off right wing domination in the rest of teh UK and if, as has been banded about, Westminster by-passes Holyrood and deals direct with councils, Scotland will be well and truly shagged as well.
      All the while Darling (the backbench patsy) is running around trying to thwart the YES campaign like some modern day King Cnut.

    58. dee says:

      Ruth Davidson tells Newsnight Scotland that 82% of Scots support tory welfare reforms,, what planet is she on??????. If we can’t defeat her, Rennie and Lamont then we are doing something way way wrong.

    59. Holebender says:

      @Gordon Smith, I think you have misunderstood the term “geographic share”. It means allocating shares based on the location (geography) of the oil & gas fields. Population share would mean only being allocated 8.4% of the UK total, regardless of where the fields actually are.
      For those who keep fretting about the “stolen” 6000 sqare miles, there’s very little oil & gas that far south, and the boundary change only applies (officially) to fisheries (although I’ve also seen it marked on maps as the boundary for renewable energy generation). The legal jurisdiction boundary for the oil & gas industry has remained unchanged since the 1960s.

    60. Jingly Jangly says:

      Whilst I would love to agree with you, a couple of issues
      1. without Scotlands wealth and exports the UK is toast. Their debt is so huge it needs
      the annual surplus from Scotland to pay the interest on the Debt
      2. As previously outlined on Wings, the labour party don’t need Scottish votes, anytime
      they have got into power they got a majority in England.
      3. The English are Imperialists therefore they will not give up any where with out a fight.
      4. They will lose their beloved Nukes and without them the permanent Seat at the UN Security Council
      I believe in more the cock up theory, one hand doesn’t know what the other is doing…

    61. gordoz says:

      What is going on ??? Watch the last 5 mins of Newsnight, go on force yourself !
      Alex Massie and former Murdo Fraser Aid discussing how only real chance for  Scottish Tories to recover is likely within an Independent Scotland ??
      Did I hear that right ???
      Getting their lifeboats out early ??

    62. Bill C says:

      Further to the BBC bias debate. Just watched Ruth Davidson being interviewed by Gordon Brewer on Newsnight Scotland.  Absolutely no mention of the constitutional question by Brewer, despite obviously knowing that Cameron and her were at odds over whether to talk about more devolved powers pre/post referendum. Discussion revolved around whether Davidson could turn around Tory fortunes in Scotland. Complete abandonment of journalistic integrity and responsibility by Brewer. Like to know what Derek Bateman thinks!

    63. Erchie says:

      Ian Brotherhood
      I typed up the RiC leaflet, that said 07:00
      “Not sure which way you’re voting in next year’s independence referendum? Bored of the same old debate? Not sure what’s true and what’s not in the media?”
      Panellists include
      – Mary Lockhart Scottish Co-operative Party
      – Gordon MacIntyre Business for Scotland
      – Lynda Williamson Newsnet Scotland
      – Janey Godley Comedian, Author, Playwright
      – Karine Polwart Award winning somg-writer
      – Stuart Braithwaite – From ‘Mogwai’ as Chairman
      The Glad Cafe 1006a Pollokshaws Road
      Wednesday Oct 2nd 7pm
      Entry by suggested donation (5/3 pounds)
      It says that it will be a lively and humorous debate between the panel and audience

    64. gordoz says:

      Bill C
      I’m sure DB classes Brewer the same as a ‘Worthless Banker’ (or do you swap the W & the B …. I can never remember)
      Did you see the end bit with Massie & co. ?

    65. dee says:

      You did indeed hear that.  Will soon be seeing “Tories for Independence Party” forming.  I actually don’t think that is as wild a remark as it may look.  I think you will see a large number of Tories starting to realise that they do have a better future in an Independent Scotland.  I think the Yes campaign should start to target them the same as Labour for Independence.
      What exactly were the boundaries in the 1960s??.

    66. Richard McHarg says:

      Is there any info available on expenditure?
      While this is great re revenues, we mustn’t forget the figures re expenditure, and then make the relevant comparisons with the rest of the UK: for example, how does any current surplus/deficit compare with England/UK as a whole?
      I appreciate that what is spent here isn’t necessarily what they say is spent, but this is the area we most need to be ready to counter.
      This is where Better Together will attack.
      Consequently, we need to be able to identify actual expenditure against allocated expenditure, while part of the UK, and then do a projection of likely expenditure as an independent state.

    67. clochoderic says:

         Just thought this photo should be more widely seen – oor Eck in a pink bunnet!

    68. HandandShrimp says:

      Ruth Davidson tells Newsnight Scotland that 82% of Scots support tory welfare reforms,,
      She will celebrate if 18% support her in the polls. Her only saving grace is that she has Willie who can talk even thicker random mince than she does and Johann who does the nasty smear stuff making her look reasonably polite and sane.

    69. Erchie says:

      @Ian Brotherhood
      So the Glad Cafe got it wrong, RiC were right, Dagnabbit

    70. Albalha says:

      Just back from the RIC debate in Shawlands, Glasgow. Great to meet @ianbrotherhood, thanks for making the journey and apologies for rushing off as Janey Godley arrived.
      Very busy and while there was a majority YES voting crowd as they filtered out I’d a good chat with a couple of young women, both leaning towards no. They explained that they were now just beginning their own ‘knowledge’ journey, far from convinced but certainly up for learning more. One of the RIC volunteers, Malcolm, had printed off the Aye Right flyers which I gave them, they’ll certainly be looking them up.

      Given the turn out there’s no doubt people are hungry for this type of debate, not perfect, things for folks to learn but a great starting point for this part of Glasgow.

      And enough cash raised to cover all the expenses of venue, the wonderful group who did the filming and sound.

      Well done to @thistle, Kevin who made great efforts with the streaming etc and the organising in general.

      Have to say one of my highlights was a long detailed chat about bitcoin, fascinating.
      Given how packed the room was I didn’t hear the debates but people sat and listened for the best part of 3 hours.

      The arguments need to be made and made clear. Anyway I’m off to Perth tomorrow for Business for Scotland Ambassador training, maybe I can get all the stats frimly embedded in my head.

      Don’t know if any other WoS people were there, if so I hope you thought it was worth the effort.

    71. rabb says:

      I’m with S_S on this one. I seriously believe the tories are playing a game here with the endgame being a total full nelson on Labour.

      This whole “United with Labour” thing hasn’t come about from an image clash (Labour being seen to be sharing a stage with Tories) it’s come about because I think Labour know they’re about to be booted square on the bollocks.
      The unfortunate thing for Labour (and a godsend to Yes) is that they do not command the support in Scotland they once had. They simply cannot compete with the grass roots Yes campaign and I suspect they know it.

      The only hope they have is control of the media. Alas the internet age is circumventing their last hope.

      It’s game on for next year!

    72. Keef says:

      That is a beauty of a pic. Thanks for posting.
      Eck looks like he is really enjoying the gag. Those pink sunnies suit him.

    73. cath says:

      “Just got back from Glasgow, the RIC Shawlands debate. I thought it started at 7.30, got there 15 mins early, but wasn’t allowed in – it was already packed. ”
      Darn. I got there about 7.15 too and was among the last let in! It was a good debate but didn’t really learn much from it, so would have probably been more fun if I’d found you guys! We’ll have to have another Glasgow meet some night I can make it.
      Mary Lockhart was particularly impressive, I though. And Michael Gray too – always quite amazed by how eloquent he is given his age. I’m sure I just used to mumble and run away from people in my early 20s.

    74. CameronB says:

      Haven’t read all the comments so hope nobody has already covered this point. On the subject of volatility, I thought I’d post this wee reminder of a couple of years back.

      Perhaps he was mad, perhaps it was a stunt. I never heard of it again.
      Goldman Sachs: the bank that thought it ruled the world
      Goldman Sachs was ‘doing God’s work’ – but it is now being investigated for fraud.
      Money and Power: How Goldman Sachs Came to Rule the World
      “The Real Smartest Guys In The Room. Compulsive, Fascinating, Damning,”
      For another insider’s perspective;

      On February 7th 2013, the Institute of Trading and Portfolio Managements Managing Partner Anton Kreil was interviewed at Cass Business School by students of the University. In this exclusive interview Kreil gives an insight into the trends occurring in world financial markets for professional and retail traders, his thoughts on the world of banking, hedge funds, career progression for graduates within the industry and what the future may hold for those graduates seeking employment at Banks and Hedge Funds.

      Note the point Anton makes at the beginning of part 2 re. major indices versus currencies. These are the 4 companies that Forbes magazine suggests run the word. They are only concerned with short-term gain, some of their stooges following Sidney Weinberg’s ‘Long-term greedy” from an early age. Social consequences? Haven’t you heard there is no such thing as society?
      Now which is more volatile, oil or finance?

    75. ianbrotherhood says:

      Well, there it is, in black and white, and the Cafe’s own bumph said 8.00.
      I did see a man arrive, perhaps 7.35-ish, and he was not happy at all:  “I’m right up for what youse are doing, but see on the detail? ye’re shite!”
      That’s not verbatim, but I hope the man himself will agree that it’s accurate in tone.
      These are niggles, but important ones, especially if people have travelled (especially on such a foul night) to end-up being excluded. It was okay for me, cause I got to meet some Wingers and have a productive chat. But if they hadn’t been there? I would not have been a happy camper.
      Teething pains are worth suffering – when they end, you have real teeth.

    76. Betsy says:

      @Albalha + anyone else who was there
      I was also at the same event and also had to rush off a wee bit early. Didn’t knowingly get to meet any Wingers but there is always another time. I did get one of the Aye Right leaflets which I left on the bus to do my wee bit to spread the word. Tbh I didn’t think Janey Godley added much to the debate at all. In contrast I could have listened to Mary Lockhart all evening. Speaking of Mary Lockhart I thought the point she made about about no one leaving her ‘Mrs Barbour’s Army’ meetings with nothing to do, was very important and something that the Yes campaign ought to use. There are lots of people getting involved who have never been politically active before but want to do something. It would be good to nurture them a bit and come up ways for more experienced hand to mentor them but also to give them useful tasks.   

    77. cath says:

      “I did see a man arrive, perhaps 7.35-ish, and he was not happy at all:”
      That’s a shame. There was room by the second half as well.

    78. Oldnat says:

      As I’d expect from professional statisticians, the methodology adopted does seem to have been a genuine attempt to disaggregate the available data.
      Corporation tax is difficult to aggregate (and I don’t blame the statisticians!) though it will favour, to some extent, the English figures. To what extent is impossible to determine.
      “Taxable profits are split into two categories: (i) overseas income, chargeable gains, gains on intangible assets and land and property and (ii) the remainder, principally trading profit. All category (i) profits are allocated to the location of the registered office. Category (ii) profits are allocated to countries according to the sub?UK split of enterprises’ employment totals.”

    79. Oldnat says:

      Whether the output of the statisticians is what the Government wanted is entirely another matter!

    80. Bill C says:

      @gordoz – Just played it back again to double check. Your are right, both Tory supporters Alex Massie and Andy McKeever said that the Tories need fiscal autonomy or full independence for a Tory revival in Scotland. Something strange going on here, Tories arguing for fiscal autonomy/independence, weird! More evidence that Scottish Skiers theory might be right? Between the Rev’s figures and that admission, I am beginning to wonder

    81. Albalha says:

      Sorry we didn’t meet. I spoke to Mary Lockhart for a good while before the event, a truly humble person. I did hear her introduce herself on the panel as ‘the person who until a certain article was as obscure as her party’, and she’d driven from just outside Kinross, that’s commitment. Good woman.
      As you know I went up and spoke to the disgruntled chaps, turns out they were SNP members who are keen on the radical view, as it was they then made it in to the second half of the debate as some folks had to leave, all’s well and all that.
      What they were telling me about the SNP, well, it’s an organised political party, nuff said.
      As I always say we need to get over that YES line then let’s have the heated debate. Without that the internal, YES, political wranglings are like pissing in the wind.

    82. gordoz says:

      dee says:
      Bill C:
      Im not fussy – fomer Tories vote YES – fine by me (more the better)

    83. silver19 says:

      @keef & @clochoderic
      Only Eck could pull that off, You simply could not see Cameron, Clegg, Miliband doing that. More power to your elbow Eck !!.

    84. Holebender says:

      @Dee, the boundary starts at the end of the land border, wiggles about a bit for a (very) few miles, then follows the line of latitude at 55° 50′ North until it intersects the international boundary between the UK and Germany.

    85. scottishPete says:

      With regard to the 42.5 billion, the figure should be higher I believe as you have not corrected into todays relative value. Net present value requires that money from multiple years is adjusted for inflation, so the actual value would be quite a bit higher I think. Too late at night to do calculation.

    86. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Strange stuff going on indeed. Just had a long chat with my sister from London (London Branch SNP). They are beginning to wonder what is going on. Somebody has suggested fracking might be the key. Apparently there is enough oil and gas to be had in England from fracking to do England for a thousand years and the Scottish reserves won’t be needed. I wonder. Maybe the Tories will be happy to set us adrift

    87. ianbrotherhood says:

      Cheers to you missus.
      I hope you got a chance to sit down at the end of it all and have a wee ten minutes to just ponder what youse did tonight – brilliant stuff.

    88. Jock McDonnell says:

      gordoz et al, Brewer should have asked if they were committed to no.
      i think the other possibility never crossed his mind but I’ve heard Massie snr consider it
      still not buying the done-deal theory but i do go along with ScottishSkier’s maths

    89. Keef says:

      @ Dave McEwan Hill
      Hi Dave interesting news from your sister.
      But let’s get one thing straight. The Tories will not be setting Scotland adrift. Scotland will have voted, after much deliberation, to stand on her own two feet. Scotland will decide (despite the biased media) if she chooses to anull the union. The Tories are just a sideshow.

    90. The Man in the Jar says:

      Eck looks like Captain Sensible in the pink beret and shades. 😆
      J. Lamont J. Baillie A. Goldie R. Davidon G. Hastings etc. will all now know where the rest of the outfit has disappeared to. 

    91. cath says:

      “Apparently there is enough oil and gas to be had in England from fracking to do England for a thousand years”
      Fracking is not entirely popular though (or necessarily safe), and you’d presumably have to do a lot of it for it to last 1000 years?

    92. Keef says:

      The amount of ‘gas’ eminating from Westminster, I’d say that is one palace that is well and truly ‘Fracked’.

    93. CameronB says:

      Re: suggestions that fracking will do England for a thousand years, some fascinating realities of forecasting here.
      Wish I’d had this guy teach me maths, but I wasn’t so lucky.
      Arithmetic, Population, and Energy
      Dr. Albert A. Bartlett from the University of Colorado in Boulder
      P.S. Chinese stability depends on exponential economic growth, which means her economy is expected to double in size over the next 14 years.

    94. JnrTick says:

      This is great, saved it to my desktop and will print a copy, take it with me and every time any of my old clients tell me with their Daily Mail by their sofa “I just don’t think we can afford it” I’ll unfold it and advise them to feast there eyes.
      Love this, thanks Rev.

    95. Albalha says:

      Well the chap I was speaking to was well aware of these reports, he had graphs from its inception until now. This ‘bust’ means there will be more bitcoins on the market. Anyway, not sure I understand it, but the worth of a bitcoin since last August 2012 is quite interesting.

    96. The Man in the Jar says:

      Glad I’m not Welch! “The New Subsidy Junkies” a rotten job but someones got to do it. Having said that I believe that they pretty consistently vote Labour in a GE. Perhaps they are next for “The Tory Chop”? 
      To our Welch brothers and sisters a big Welcome to a brave new world! (Hopefully) 

    97. The Man in the Jar says:

      Sorry Welsh to late to edit. 🙁

    98. The Man in the Jar says:

      P.S. Rev Stu I think I have caught your cold.

    99. CameronB says:

      The Man in the Jar
      I’ve just gotten shot of it myself. Bacteriological warfare? 🙂

    100. Oldnat says:

      Scottish Sun Front Page
      Cameron spends less than a minute defending the UK.

    101. Bob Howie says:

      Vote Yes in 2014 and see what projects get cancelled in rUK and that is your answer as to how valuable we are to Westminster. Another reason, if we are scroungers why are they trying so hard to hold onto us?

    102. For die says:

      @cameronB Nope – virological warfare. 
      From an insomniac!

    103. Swithy says:

      The oil tables have oil income split on a per-person/population basis (2 alternative ways).  Either 7.8% or 8-9%.
      A tiny bit of what the oil income would be on the legal, territorial basis, after independence.

    104. john king says:

      Craig P says
      “It’s almost as if the Tories secretly want to help us.”
      Has anyone told wee Ruthie  she seemed determined to make an arse out of herself at the Tory Party conference to a few cleaners 

    105. Peter Forrest says:

      Is it just me being dumb, or do these figures simply not add up? I know the figures are rounded to the nearest million but take 1999-00 as an example: 251,563 + 10,486 + 24,367 + 6,142 = 292,558, not 293,803. That’s a difference of 1.2 billion when rounding should produce a difference of +/- 4 million (0.004 billion). So saying “per cent total may not sum due to rounding” is misleading — they do not sum because the UK total does not sum.

    106. Tattie-boggle says:

      Labour are in for a right filleting from Scotland and rUK Cameron is playing a blinder
      he may end up being known as the PM who lost Scotland but will be a tory legend as the Wizard who slay the Labour party

    107. john king says:

      john mguire says
      “keep in mind that Westminster changed the territorial waters line norther from (say) about Newcastle that landed more oil and gas revenues into English accounting. So our Scottish numbers are understated.”
      But if you take into account Morags insistence that Craig Murray is talking waash and the realigned sea boundary is just a correction that would have been justified after a yes vote anyway, on the other hand I cant see how that is a fair alignment (sorry morag) I think Murray’s boundary has my vote, however there are only a small amount of wells in that area but it would still surely amount to a good few doubloons.

      But we forget the less valuable but still important (to the fishermen of the east coast) are the fishing rights, 
      now I don’t know how much of a resource 6000sq/m of north sea is worth in terms of fishing catches, and that (good husbandry accepted) is a resource that will go on forever, long after oil is a forgotten commodity
      but I know I’d rather have it than not. 

    108. john king says:

      Inbihir Anainn says
      “Is it not the case that the UK government had created a new country named Extra Regio Territories in order to conceal the oil revenues from the Scottish account.”
      So Im not the only one who noticed that?
      Extra Regio Territories 
      “The economic territory of a country can be broken down into regional and extraregio territory.
      The extraregio territory is made up of parts of the economic territory of a country which cannot be attached directly to a single region.
      The extraregio territory consists of, among others, national air-space, territorial waters and the continental shelf lying in international waters over which the country enjoys exclusive rights; territorial enclaves, embassies, consulates, military and scientific bases; deposits of energy and natural resources outside the continental shelf of the country, worked by resident units.
      The nomenclature of territorial units for statistics (NUTS) provides a single, uniform breakdown of the economic territory of the European Union. NUTS is the territorial breakdown for compiling regional accounts.”
      Now I dont know about you but post a yes vote my understanding of that is the
      Extra Regio Territory 
      becomes an
      Exclusive economic zone

      I’ ve seen a poster on that racist rant from that idiot Simon Heffer in the mail stating that the rights to north sea oil would be subject to years of legal wrangling and would result in Engerland retaining a population share of 90% 
      I said good luck with that 

    109. john king says:

      Had to edit that last post to remove the definition of  EEZ  because it was full of and I value my head, the rev would have killed me, 
      but you all know what a EEZ is dont you?
       and if you dont, look it up  
      Im too young to die 🙂

    110. bunter says:

      Quite extraordinary spin on the above figures and Swinneys oil fund from Gardham in todays Herald. desperate stuff but  quite funny as you can almost see the panic in the writing.

    111. Craig M says:

      On France 24 news this morning, Gavin McCrone saying that Scotland could be independent!

    112. bunter says:

      Ooh and the Derek Bateman allegations also get an airing in The Herald too. Good start to the day!

    113. john king says:

      clochoderic says
      ”  Just thought this photo should be more widely seen – oor Eck in a pink bunnet!”
      strewth I thought I was looking at Elton John there, 
      I wouldn’t say that to Alex 
      he can run faster than me

    114. john king says:

      the man in the jar says
      “P.S. Rev Stu I think I have caught your cold.”
      Damn computer viruses 🙂

    115. john king says:

      john king says
      ecause it was full of and I value my head, the rev would have killed me
      what happend to the (<cite>) tags bit? the cite tag fairies must have remove it to make me look daft?
      damn those cite tag fairies 

    116. JLT says:

      Jingly Jangly
      1. without Scotlands wealth and exports the UK is toast. Their debt is so huge it needs
      the annual surplus from Scotland to pay the interest on the Debt
      2. As previously outlined on Wings, the labour party don’t need Scottish votes, anytime
      they have got into power they got a majority in England.
      3. The English are Imperialists therefore they will not give up any where with out a fight.
      4. They will lose their beloved Nukes and without them the permanent Seat at the UN Security Council
      Hi Jingly,
      Taking your 4 points.
      1. This is probably the one argument to my theory? Why let Scotland go? Unless, the Tories are bartering some sort of deal post-indy (Scotland gets no access to oil in the Falklands, rUK gets access to some oil in Scotland, using Scotland as a backdoor to Europe if Scotland stays in the EU, etc). They Tories may be willing to take a hit if it gives them absolute continual power in England. To be honest …on this one matter, I would be speculating.
      2. Labour might not need the Labour seats in Scotland, but Labour will need as many seats as possible if it is in opposition. That means they need Scotland. Who knows what nonsensical laws the Tories will try to pass. If there is a chance of blocking those laws in Parliament with the help of the Libs (and maybe a few Tory backbenchers), then these Scottish seats become truly vital. Labour might not get in power, but they will need strength to oppose any draconian new laws!
      3. The one flaw in the English character; sentimentality to a past age when dominance was everything. There is one way to look at this – Russia and the Ukraine. In other words, no matter how strong (or weak) a future England becomes, Scotland will always remain within its sphere of influence. Scotland may become independent, but we are not truly ‘free’. We will still be tied to Sterling. We will still have nuclear submarines at Faslane (I don’t see this getting shutdown for the subs to be honest. England will always wangle something for the subs to remain there), we will share embassies, which also means shared influence. Scotland might be able to deal with her own affairs, but Westminster will still be nearby to poke her nose in.
      4. No, they won’t. The US won’t allow it to begin with (they need an ally that can cast a vote against the Chinese and Russians (thus making it 2-2 in disputes)). Scotland will agree that England should retain its seat on the Security Council, and will make no future demands that they share it. I see no problems for the rUK with the Security Council, even though we know it’s an ace up our sleeve when it comes to the post-indy negotiations. If Russia or the Chinese protest, England will just tell them to ‘git tae ****’ (if we use the good old Scottish accent!)
      And as to the nukes …they will be at Faslane as pointed out in point 3
      I do see your arguments, Jingly, but I think they are all workable for England during the post-indy agreements. To be honest, I expect Scotland to get most of what she wants, but there is absolute no danger that England is going to be left high and dry. This is the Establishment, and I trust them not, one iota! They will walk away with a few things that they want too!

    117. scottish_skier says:

      The amount of ‘gas’ emanating from Westminster, I’d say that is one palace that is well and truly ‘Fracked’.
      I’ve said this before, but worth repeating. Shale gas. 
      If Westminster feels it’s sitting on a big source of the stuff, then losing Scotland’s oil is suddenly not quite so bad.

    118. JLT says:

      Totally agree with you. I think next summer will be white hot in Scottish politics. One thing I didn’t add to my theory, was that the one thing that has Cameron laughing his socks off; the main fall guy for all of this, should Scotland leave the Union, is Darling.

      How Darling can’t see this is staggering! A Labour puppet to a Tory Prime Minister. Added to this, is the most ineffectual and practically illiterate set of Scottish Labour MP’s as well as MSP’s that has ever existed in the Labour Party.

      Bevan, Attlee and Co must weep at what has become of Labour. Greed and ambition has all but destroyed Labour.

    119. JLT says:

      Never thought of that Scottish Skier. Another valid point. Well said!

    120. Marker Post says:

      Rev, I wouldn’t dismiss the first graph completely, it does appear to show that tax receipts in Scotland have grown at a faster pace over the last 13 years than in any other part of the UK.
      Incidentally, does anyone know what it means, “disaggregating using a geographic methodology”? I can understand geographic share of oil receipts, but how do you disaggregate corporation tax using a geographic methodology, other than place of HQ which really is not disaggregated?
      Also, really confused, because Scottish Govt budget from Westminster is roughly 28 billion for 2013-2014, yet revenues according to this graph were 42 billion. That’s about 14 billion that Westminster spends on our behalf. Where exactly does that go? Defence we are told is around 4.5 billion (although we know it’s nearer 2 billion), where exactly does the other 9.5 billion go? Does welfare spending come out of the 9.5, or does it come out of the 28? And what about the rest, surely it can’t all be on keeping the embassies open?

    121. Ivan McKee says:

      @ Bunter
      ref Gardhams comments, and a general point on the data.
      This data set refers to HMRC receipts. Comparing against GERS data it seems to therefore exclude items such as Council Tax receipts and others (which are collected through a route other than HMRC, eg local councils etc).
      GERS gives a more comprehensive overview of total receipts.
      So the 9.8% Gardham refers to relates to this data set – HRMC receipts only – where Scotland generated 9.8% of UK receipts in 2011-12 (£46bn out of £467bn)
      When you look at the total receipts from GERS the 9.9% that Scotland generates still stands (£57bn out of a UK total of £573bn).
      So even his feeble attempt at negative spin backfires (as I suspect like many of those who make a living ‘talking the talk’ – the good Rev excluded of course – Gardham doesn’t know how to turn a calculator on never mind drive a spreadsheet).

    122. john king says:

      nice to see you back btw tony, 
      your were abroad as I recall wernt you?

    123. Another London Dividend says:

      I trust someone will query the geographical basis on which the HMRC allocated petroleum revenues as the data says only  82% of UK total is from Scotland but GERS reckon 90% and Prof Kemp says if you use median line based on UK continental shelf then 94% of the revenues would accrue to Scotland.

    124. Erchie says:

      There are other reasons to be cautions of bitcoins, if for no other reason than authorities and criminals are targetting them now, including taking over domestic machines to use the graphics cards to “mine” for bitcoins.
      How much of that is a scare story to put folk off bitcoins we’ll see, but I’m naturally suspicious of any currency even less tangible than a quantitvely eased pound

    125. ianbrotherhood says:

      Sooner or later, Derek Bateman will be back on GMS – as a guest. Will the current crop of presenters draw straws to decide who gives him a ‘grilling’?

    126. Ghengis says:

      @ Holebender
      “there’s very little oil & gas that far south, and the boundary change only applies (officially) to fisheries”
      As you know when an oil field is ‘running out’ that only means that slightly less than half of the oil has been extracted. The rest of the oil is too difficult WITH CURRENT TECHNOLOGY to extract. Oil extraction technologies are continually improving. eg
      So there is still plenty of oil in those 8 major oil fields passed to England’s account by Labour in 1999
      Craig Murray – BBC bias – Deficit – North sea boundary + map:
      Someone above mentioned fisheries and renewables potential in that part of the North Sea. That is not to be forgotten or discounted either. we’ll have that back too. Thieving baskets!

    127. MajorBloodnok says:

      Can I ask a question (that might have been answered earlier but I’ve missed it)?
      Do the figures for Scotland include oil revenues on a true geographical basis (i.e. in terms of a notional production from Scottish territorial waters as well as some future Scottish offshore Exlcusive Economic Zone (EEZ) = about 90% of the oil revenue), or when it says ‘geographical basis’ does it actually mean ‘percentage population per UK constituent nation basis’ = about 8.4% of the oil revenue? 
      If the latter is the case then we’re missing a hell of lot of oil revenue from our bottom line, but even if we’re not, the economic arguments against Independence are looking a bit thin (rubs hands gleefully).

    128. bunter says:

      @Ivan McKee
      Cheers for that! youve just cleared up for me a point that I wasnt sure of.

    129. scottish_skier says:

      As you know when an oil field is ‘running out’ that only means that slightly less than half of the oil has been extracted. 
      Yes, recovery rates are improving all the time. Other new technologies help too for field life extension and marginal developments.
      For example, the uni spin-out company my colleagues and I set up invented a device for real-time optimisation of hydrate inhibition. In it’s first ‘full’ implementation, we’ve helped TOTAL extend the field life of Nuggets by 3 years so far, increasing production by 2%, yielding and extra 2.8 million barrels of oil equivalent at a value of ~300 million USD. Also reduced methanol dosing from 28 to 0%, which is brilliant as methanol is a real problem for contamination; large fines being placed on operators trying to export methanol contaminated gas/condensate.
      There was an article on this in the Time Scotland business supplement the other week.

    130. Gordon Bain says:

      Totally O/T – Gambia have declared they are to leave the Commonwealth, effective immediately! Their reason is that they no longer want to be associated with colonialism. Go Gambia!

    131. dee says:

      Going by the replies to this post and all the detailed information we are getting on graphs and tables, the average guy/girl on the street will not have one clue what is being said or shown to them.  I know a lot of you are economists and statisticians but most of the voters we need to capture are not in that league.  So I hope the Scottish Government/Yes Campaign can put out something that these people can easily equate to, so they really get a handle on this very important information.

    132. Andy Kerr says:

      I am a pensioner living in Scotland with a private pension from a provider based in London. I have to pay income tax on this pension. Does this mean that my tax is considered as an English contribution.

    133. MochaChoca says:

      Dee, the ONS are apperently putting together a website with comprehensive comparisions between the nations of the UK.

    134. Brian Powell says:

      £32  million per year in fines from  Scottish Courts goes directly to the Treasury .

    135. Mosstrooper says:

      @ Dee,
      You don’t need all the economic statistics to make the point. Just tell people that according to Westminster/UK figures for each of the past 14 years Scotland has been paying an average of an additional £3 Billion. WE are subsidizing THEM and just get them to think what that extra £43 billion could do for the sick, the elderly and the homeless.

    136. desimond says:

      In case anyone missed Ruth “Hey we got 400’000 votes” Davidsons car crash on Scotland Tonight, it truly was abysmal. She must have been on such a high getting the podium before Dave that she forgot the harsh reality and completely underestimated what was in store.

      The highlight was when she told Rona the presenter “ohh Rona, Im sorry but you couldnt ne more wrong!@ and Rona said @Well let me quote exactly what David Cameron said@. Cue wee Ruth staring into a dark void of despair. Totally shown up and she wont be appearing on Scotland Tonight in the near future after that self foot-shooting exercise.
      Also, can someone tell me how John Swinney gets “But Oil prices are so volatile’  abuse from Mr Darling for daring to declare 2 Oil Funds for Scotland…One of which would be to handle and impact due to instability of oil prices! Whats Swinney thinking of, daring to manage risk, its just not on!

    137. dee says:

      That is exactly the point I am trying to make. You just said the ONS will be bringing out new updated information on tax etc.. your average Mr and Mrs Asda/Lidl will think that ONS is the name of a new Boy Band.

    138. CameronB says:

      @ Gordon Bain
      First I heard anything was going on in Gambia. Didn’t know anything about the place so did a quick search.
      I wish them all the best and hope to soon join them. However, I think they will probably need all the luck they can get if Yahya Jammeh is still on the scene.
      Foreign Policy Junta: Trained in The U.S.A.
      Country: The Gambia
      Trained: Jammeh, then a captain, attended a military police training course at Fort McClellan, Alabama, in 1994.
      Back home: Only 29 years old and just returned from his training in Alabama, Jammeh and four other junior officers led a bloodless coup in 1994, overthrowing longtime democratically elected president Dawda Jawara. Jammeh promised that his would be a “coup with a difference” and that he would stand down “as soon as we have set things right.” Eighteen years later, he is still in power.
      In addition to brutal crackdowns on the opposition and the press, Jammeh has become known for his eccentricities, including promoting a banana-and-herb cure for AIDS and rounding up those suspected of sorcery. After he was re-elected in 2011 to a fourth term in a widely criticized election, His Excellency the President Sheik Professor Alhaji Doctor Yahya Jammeh, as he calls himself, told his critics they could “go to hell” and vowed to rule for a billion years.

    139. Onzebill says:

      Thanks for heads up about the Common Weal fund raising, my contribution made.

    140. Vambomarbeleye says:

      We are allways hearing them bang on about state pensions. Is there any figures of the number of people who die before being able to claim it. What is the amount that goes unclaimed because of this and how is it used.
      Some thing that keeps me awake at night.

    141. Craig Stewart says:

      Wow, I think we really need to get some sort of proper forum set up for discussions… 🙂
      Anyway, I was reading this article and a few things came to mind about the accuracy of this which a few have already hit upon. Things like court fines, export duties from english ports for whiskey etc, oil income from extra-regio area and tax income from derivatives trading from the City of London tax-haven all would skew the figures.

      The last one especially as apart from financial trading, England doesn’t really have much in the way of industry any more?

    142. Murray McCallum says:

      John Swinney’s approach is financial common sense – preparing plans for both good and bad times. It’s based on the real world – you have to be prepared for shocks. This is why small, well run economies disproportionately out perform larger ones.

      Swinney’s approach is the opposite to the “hire and fire”, “boom and bust” Conservative-Labour approach to spending.

      Conservative-Labour have run the UK economy into the ground, under a mountain of debt, neglected manufacturing strategy, reliance on consumer spending and a bottomless appetite for squandering funds on nuclear weapons while pretending to be a global power.
      The UKOKers who talk of “deeper pockets” fail to see the massive holes that are in these pockets.

    143. Albalha says:

      Yes without our exports the current negative balance of payments figure in the UK would increase. 

    144. HenBroon says:

      You mentioned the Falklands and oil. As I understand it the revenues from any oil is to accrue direct to the Falklands who will then pay the UK for services rendered.

      “The islands’ status as an autonomous territory gives Britain no claim to the windfall, despite the U.K. maintaining 1,200 military personnel in the British Falklands garrison. Argentina’s 1982 invasion sparked a 74-day conflict in which 255 British and 649 Argentine military personnel died, along with three islanders.”

      The contrast with that of Scotland is quite stark.

    145. HenBroon says:

      Those of nervous disposition should not click this link!

    146. desimond says:

      SO far we have had ‘What about our brothers and sisters in the North of ENgland!’..soon it will be ‘But look at how your leaving might affect the people of Wales?’.

      It looks like the people in power at Northern Ireland already have their eye on an exit strategy so I’ll exclude them from any impact.

    147. MajorBloodnok says:

      Vambomarbeleye says:  We are allways hearing them bang on about state pensions. Is there any figures of the number of people who die before being able to claim it. What is the amount that goes unclaimed because of this and how is it used.
      Some thing that keeps me awake at night.
      This is bang on.  Scotland contributes to things like state penions on an equal basis (although as we’ve seen we actually contribute more than our population size warrants) but as people in Scotland don’t live as long on average as pensioners in other parts of the UK, we are effectively subsidising the state pensions of the other nations.
      In an Independent Scotland life expectancy and other factors could be taken into account more accurately in calculating things like the state pension and other welfare payments, although I’m hoping that in an Independent Scotland life expectancy and health generally will improve radically (another Union dividend).

    148. rabb says:

      Andy Kerr,
      It depends on where your tax office resides. If your paying your tax through centre1 in East Kilbride then it will accrue as Scottish tax revenue. If your tax office was in say Newcastle then your tax would accrue as English tax revenue.
      Personally, my tax office is in England although I live & work in Scotland so my tax revenue accrues as English.

    149. Archie [not Erchie] says:

      Alex Massie on Newsnight last night commenting on Ruth Davidson’s gibbering on about how knocking on doors is increasing the Scottish Tory support.

      Quote “The Scottish Tories have had more autopsies than Taggart”

    150. ianbrotherhood says:

      Stumbled across this great Matt McGinn site – it opens with a beautiful song and slide-show of family snaps that had me in tears.
      It’s such a shame the man didn’t live to see what’s happening now – he’d surely have been loving every minute of it.

    151. Brian Powell says:

      On how much the present Labour No camp will lie to us. An interesting article on Newsnet Scotland, concerning membership of NATO.
      In the 80s, Kinnock, and the Labour shadow-Government established that getting rid of the Nuclear fleet (equivalent of Trident) would not stop the UK being in NATO.
      They had the same arguments leveled at them that we get from the No camp now!

    152. Iain says:

      ‘I wish them all the best and hope to soon join them. However, I think they will probably need all the luck they can get if Yahya Jammeh is still on the scene.’

      Jammeh also thinks homosexuality is one of the greatest threats to the human race. Probably more interesting than Gambia leaving the Commonwealth is how comfortable the Commonwealth was with having a member with such a regime, while happily popping out statements about an independent Scotland having to re-apply. Kind of a not caring to belong to any club that will have them as a member situation.

    153. Calgacus says:

      Nice find Brian Powell ! 

    154. Bill C says:

      Derek Bateman hits the Herald!

    155. NorthBrit says:

      Unionist of the week?
      Clearly untrue statement in para 1.
      And in para 2.
      Confesses to being a liar in para 4.
      Uses the word “separatist” in para 10.
      Goes utterly batshit in para 11 (apparently billionaires can’t wait to live in the neo-liberal tax haven that Scotland will become if the evil SNP get their way).
      Rants about Salmond in para 12.
      Finishes with:
      “Make no mistake, the only clear side of this debate is that intelligent public discourse matters, and that we’re not getting any of it.” 
      Not true.  But completely true about this article.

    156. MajorBloodnok says:

      @Brian Powell
      So not only is Labour depending on ‘low information voters’ it’s relying on ‘low information Labour politicians’ as well.

    157. Grant_M says:

      @Brian Powell
      I actually posted these links the other day in ‘Phoning it in’…

    158. Edward says:

      Slightly O/T
      Excellent piece over on Newsnet who have exposed that Labour leader Neil Kinnock in the 80’s stated “Having nuclear weapons is not a condition for membership of NATO”

      Sounds like another nail in Labour’s and the union’s coffin

    159. cath says:

      “Vote Yes in 2014 and see what projects get cancelled in rUK and that is your answer as to how valuable we are to Westminster.”
      It’s interesting to see the high speed rail link is already being talked down.

    160. CameronB says:

      Of course, a YES vote for independence will have no effect on Scotland’s status within the Commonwealth(?). A boy can wish though.

    161. HandandShrimp says:


      Not sure I would class the Denise Mina piece as Unionist. Off the wall? Yes.

      A journalistic mood piece where the truth fits where it touches and mostly the garment is very loose fitting (Susan Calman didn’t get any death threats, Murdoch and Trump are peripheral figures and what castles are being sold?). It is clearly written for an American audience and plays to their bells and whistles but as to informing Scots here about the debate in progress? Not even close.

    162. tartanfever says:

      Lots of questions about these figures – whats included, what isn’t and so on. Ultimately, those ‘not enough info’ voters will not be happy. They want a rock solid cast in concrete answers. 
      I suggest we fund raise to pay for a qualified economist/accountant to spend the next three months trawling all the available data to come up with a definitive (or as close as we can get) set of figures. Whatever the SNP produce will be ridiculed by the press and I’m not sure the Yes campaign will do it.
      How much would that cost ? £10k ?

    163. Frances says:

      Tartanfever :
      £10K will get you about 20 hours with a CA!
      And all our Inheritance Tax heads south. I don’t think there are any of those offices in Scotland anymore.

    164. kendomacaroonbar says:

      I would like to see open kimono on Scotlands P&L which can show exactly the revenue streams GENERATED within Scotlan ( even if the money is sucked down south ) and actual expenditure WITHIN Scotland ( and not funds spent on our behalf elsewhere)…then and only then can we get a handle on the reality of the numbers.
      Does anybody know if such a scenario has been created already ?

    165. Brian Powell says:

      Apologies I missed that post you had. Still, this kind of info is worth repeating often.

    166. Gus says:

      rabb says:
      3 October, 2013 at 11:06 am

      Andy Kerr,
      It depends on where your tax office resides.
      It has nothing to do with you tax office, HMRC uses your post code to determine which country your taxes are allocated to. If you follow the link to the report you will find this. HMRC do not include all taxpayers but selects about 700,000 and prorates the UK total based on the sample compared to the total number of taxpayers.
      The methodology is for 2010/2011 but is also used for later years.

    167. Vambomarbeleye says:

      Thanks for the link. Much appreciated.

    168. Brian Powell says:

      Also worth repeating is that in the 1990s Spain had the US remove its Nuclear strike force and missiles from Spanish soil and was admitted to NATO. A Unionist commentator said, the BBC debate from the Borders a few weeks ago,  that no country had removed Nuclear Weapons and then been allowed into NATO!
      It’s the out and out lies from the Anti people that gets to me. Kirsty Wark came out with few on that programme too. She has been well trusted at researching her info in the past, so her statements carry weight.

    169. Vambomarbeleye says:

      Why give the nukes to England. Lets just decomision them as an example to the rest of the world. Do we realy want a neighbour with these weapons.

      Can any one tell me the position about nuclear propulsion systems in subs and ships.

    170. Desimond says:

      Vambomarbeleye ..If we need the US to assist with such silly little items such as launch codes, are they actually the UKs nukes? I suspect John Kerry will be looking out a passport as soon as that YES vote comes in!

    171. rabb says:

      Thanks Gus. I was under the impression the figures were pooled from tax offices in each country.
      Fair doos!!

    172. Grant_M says:

      @ Brian Powell
      No need to apologise. There’s a huge amount of excellent analysis, information and comment on WOS every day – and it’s all worth reading, sharing and repeating.
      O/T. Part 5 of The Fear Factor:
      ‘The Artists, the Press and the Black, Black Oil’

    173. Roland Smith says:

      I pay income tax on an annuity that is managed down in England and the tax office I deal with is not centre one in Scotland. So does HMRC aggregate this income tax based on my post code or my insurance firm in England that collects the tax and pays it to HMRC?. 

    174. Keith says:

      That article uses HMRC stats to proclaim “It is, then, clear beyond any reasonable doubt in which direction subsidies flow within the UK. Scots out-produce anyone else and generate wealth significantly out of proportion to Scotland’s size.”

      What it doesn’t mention is that within the same HMRC source, there are actually two tables showing total UK receipts, one on a geographical basis and one on a per person basis.

      The first table is favourable to the author’s conclusion, the second, the per person calculation, which is surely more relevant to his summation, actually shows that Scots on a per person basis produce less than their fair share of the total – well below the 8.4% of Scotland’s contribution to the UK population.

    175. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “the second, the per person calculation, which is surely more relevant to his summation”

      Why on Earth would it be relevant? There is no chance – none whatsoever – of oil being divided on a population basis, nor should there be.

    176. Keith says:

      Can you please explain the difference between the two calculations used on the source article? I’m obviously misunderstanding them. Thanks.

    177. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Can you please explain the difference between the two calculations used on the source article? I’m obviously misunderstanding them. Thanks.”

      One represents Scottish finances if a geographic share of oil revenue was attributed to Scotland (that is, the tax receipts from the 90% or so of oil which would lie in an independent Scotland’s territorial waters under international law). The other represents Scottish finances if, for some inexplicable reason, oil revenues belonging to Scotland were shared with the rest of the UK, with 85% going to England in line with population size.

    178. Mah auld bunnet says:

      Thats great! Noo here some o’ the bastards that dodged £120Billion in tax. Must be tough trying to muster all that up from all yer hidey holes! I am being sarky!

    179. Taranaich says:

      Something I think which is important is to get international commentators into the debate. Certainly Blair McDougall already has. But I was struck by this piece, and the comments:
      This sort of ignorant nonsense can only continue if we don’t do anything about it. Some of the people there are clearly Britnats, but a few just seem uninformed. If we’re to be an independent nation who wants to play a part in the wider world on our own terms, then we should lay the groundwork now.

    180. les wilson says:

      Just caught a program on channel 5 “The Real Braveheart ” where they destroyed almost everything about William Wallace. He was a common thief, he was this he was that. Even the battle that made him famous was ” luck” due to a mistake by the English, we did not play by the rules of war at the time.

      There were 2-3000 Scots and around 10,000 English, the lowest figure I have ever seen about the battle. We was not really the leader, the Earl of Moray was, most likely.

      Even his sword in Stirling is apparently  a fake.

      Turned off after that. However, I am sure I read about this being made and it was what  I expected, so they could destroy the Wallace legend. That is what they did. This I  am sure was being made by STV,obviously they bottled it and sold it to channel five.

      Maybe we need to give some of their greatest hero’s the same treatment.

      How about Churchill, who called Dunkirk a miracle, he never to my knowledge spoke of him leaving the Highland Division to guard there rear, in order for Dunkirk to happen. Abandoned with no ammunition, they had to surrender to the Panzer guns.  Thousands were captured aye it was a miracle right enough.

    181. Taranaich says:

      Les sigh.  Doesn’t surprise me that The “Truth” About William Wallace would be a hatchet job, though I am surprised it was Channel 5 and not, say, Panorama.  I will say, however, there is a grain of truth regarding Moray, but it’s more due to him being a forgotten hero than Wallace being some sort of fraud. BOTH were made Guardian of Scotland, after all.

    182. Morag says:

      Hmmm.  When Andy Murray first showed up at Wimbledon aged about 17 and not shortening his first name, my first reaction was, wow, there’s a name to conjure with!

    183. Morag says:

      leaving the Highland Division to guard there rear, in order for Dunkirk to happen. Abandoned with no ammunition, they had to surrender to the Panzer guns.  Thousands were captured aye it was a miracle right enough.
      Including my cousin.  Spent five years in a German PoW camp.

      Still.  I remember sitting in the church at his funeral.  He died when he was about 85, after a long and productive life.  He was my father’s older brother’s older son.  And on the wall beside the pulpit was a marble war memorial, with one of the carved names standing out for me.  The name of my mother’s oldest brother’s only son.  Who had been too young to go off with the other lads at the start of the war, but who joined the RAF later.

      He disappeared over the English Channel in the final months of the war.  His body was never found.

      So looking back, Churchill arguably saved my older cousin’s life.  Not that I’m defending his actions, I just thought the whole thing was massively ironic.

    184. David in Kent says:

      I comment here as an Englishman of Scottish background.

      Emotionally I would be sorry to see Scotland go as I believe we are stronger together and our German and French friends would be delighted to see us weakened.

      Despite what other commenters say I don’t believe English people are hostile to Scots though I am shocked by the hostility from Scotland.

      I am surprised to hear Scots complaining about being ruled from England when I see the last Labour government was packed full of Scots ruling us without an English majority.

      No doubt we in England would be better off without the 40 Labour MPs.

    185. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I am surprised to hear Scots complaining about being ruled from England when I see the last Labour government was packed full of Scots ruling us without an English majority.”

      Um, Labour DID have an English majority last time.

      Where are you detecting “hostility” towards the English?

    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

    ↑ Top