maxie Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 Any concession to the Scots must impact the finance available to The English we are already the recipients of less per person than the Scots Irish or Welsh so I will ask again how will I as an Englishman benefit from the concessions made to keep the ungrateful beggars on board KW You as an Englishman will benefit because you will feel better in yourself by being generous to the Celtic fringe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannon Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 (edited) Scotland has been getting fed the scraps from Westminster as it is. Giving them more doesn't necessarily mean the english will get less. Charity starts at home, no? Take a look at how much uk money is going abroad. I'd confidently say that any proposed additional contributions to Scotland wouldn't even scratch the surface. Edited September 19, 2014 by Cannon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 perhaps we receive less per person because we do not pay as much per person into the treasury as the scots do; glass half empty is it KW? you will benefit from having a stronger local voice & power to deal with issues in your patch. how your local county spends and raises its finances will be their job and will deal with the needs in your area. ps: do you have a chip on both shoulders or do you walk lop sided? Scotland 'got' £16.5bn more in UK public spending in 2009-10 than it contributed to total UK revenues - or a 'subsidy' of around £3,150 per head.and still does or do you believe the SNP spin? KW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 Cannon - it would be nice to think that you are right, but the doubt remains. We throw money at Argentina and India, amongst others - who don't even want it. Will we stop? I think not, sadly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 The promise of more powers has not been fully articulated, we Scot's may well get full control over income tax but there will be a variation in the block grant, it wont be all give to the Scot's and less to England & Wales. Buffoon Brown taking it upon himself to ride the white charger into the process has thrown a big spanner in the works and the outcome of all of this is that there will have to be significant change across the UK. The English people have to decide what sort of representation that they want, if you want regional assemblies then campaign for it, if you want large City based administrations then push for that. I believe the push should be for a much smaller central government with meaningful devolved powers to regional assemblies, this has to be done efficiently and gives an opportunity to get rid of much of the bloat associated with Westminster and Whitehall. No more layers of ineffective administration.The English have to decide what they want and make that happen. As much as I disagree with Alex Salmond and his ideals and was very much in favour and support of a No vote, the man will be remembered for playing his part in changing UK politics and he deserves recognition for that. I think the changes were coming anyway, there is so much dissatisfaction of the Westminster establishment in the UK, but this Scottish referendum has brought that about much faster. The English regions need to find their voice and make it heard. All you proud Yorkshire men, you have a bigger voting franchise in your region than we do in Scotland, you can make a difference but you have to want to. You can choose to vent your spleen towards Scotland who dared to speak up and bemoan how hard done by you all are by the greetin' faced sweaty socks, or you can choose to find your voice and speak up too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islandgun Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 hi guys; just back from holiday and have been reading through these posts. Have to say as an Englishman I am disgusted by the contempt some of my fellow countrymen have for the scots? As a staunch Unionist, Im very pleased it was a NO vote BUT we should be thanking them, given the good that has come from them having the balls to take on the establishment; it is unmeasurable! the shake ups that will have to happen at Westminster will benefit us in England, those in wales and the northern irish as well as Scotland, if the government are true to their word of delivering extra powers. good on the Scottish and a heart felt thanks and respect from an Englishman Robbie right on You as an Englishman will benefit because you will feel better in yourself by being generous to the Celtic fringe. ginger fringe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashman Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 I see Salmon's resignation speech was conducted with all the class one has come to expect from him - none. Some NED work on the horizon, perhaps? Somewhere that needs his brand of team building and loyalty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graiglearn Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 graiglearn - you can wriggle all you want. You made allegations about the Chief Constable and his views on city dwellers and people who made a noise. Please publish your proof. Stop prattling on about a bloke you know or BASC. They have nothing to do with what you said. aint me who's wriggling or missing the point ,cannot spell it out any clearer ,just pretend you know nothing which should not be hard.I take it you know you can loose your ticket for speeding {disregard for law} shouting in public{public unrest} even urinating in a public place,all these are at the discression of the Chief Constable who can refuse or refuse grant of ticket if they wish to do so ,they are now looking into your past where acts of non violence can be taken into account = the things I just mentioned ,also if you want I can get an ex chief Constable of a major scottish city to verify ,but then you would not believe him I suppose so reality will come as a shock one day ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotslad Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 Shame he never offered to go before the referendum if it was succesful and after the seperation was finalised, that could of made all the difference. Lot of folk in scotland not big salmond fans and he was in a different league to most other politicains in the country the now (inc most at westminster) would of been very hard to shift. Shame he has gone, althou i didnae like him he was a shrewd operator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 graiglearn - you attributed views to the Chief Constable. Did he say these things? If yes - proof would be nice - or maybe not possible, because he didn't say them.. If not - why did you attribute them to him? Alex Salmond didn't answer questions he didn't like, because he had no answers. You seem remarkably similar. Can we now forget the bloke you know, the BASC, the ex-Chief Constable of a major Scottish City and concentrate on the only Chief Constable you quoted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 All this talk of it`s Scotlands oil and it`s Britains oil is incorrect it belongs to the oil company that brought it to the surface not government. It is the tax on that oil that governments want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graiglearn Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 graiglearn - you attributed views to the Chief Constable. Did he say these things? If yes - proof would be nice - or maybe not possible, because he didn't say them.. If not - why did you attribute them to him? Alex Salmond didn't answer questions he didn't like, because he had no answers. You seem remarkably similar. Can we now forget the bloke you know, the BASC, the ex-Chief Constable of a major Scottish City and concentrate on the only Chief Constable you quoted? keep it up your doing fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 I am happy to desist, in the knowledge that you can't provide proof about what the Chief Constable said. I will draw a line under it. Will you or will you have a last dig? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graiglearn Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 I am happy to desist, in the knowledge that you can't provide proof about what the Chief Constable said. I will draw a line under it. Will you or will you have a last dig? proof of what he did even a domestic is enough to take ticket ,and I know that too, so would hate this to be looked apon as that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 It's honestly pathetic. You cited his views - but can't come up with a shred of proof to support your claim. Did he say the things you cited - yes or no? How hard is that to understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun4860 Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 I am happy to desist, in the knowledge that you can't provide proof about what the Chief Constable said. I will draw a line under it. Will you or will you have a last dig? proof of what he did even a domestic is enough to take ticket ,and I know that too, so would hate this to be looked apon as that If the pair of can't agree to disagree then you will no longer be allowed to post on this topic. Ive asked you both to be civil and stop the squabbling but you don't seem able to Can we draw a line under it now PLEASE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 (edited) aris - on the money about the tax. Show me a Government who isn't interested in revenue and I will show you a flying pig. Shaun - point taken - dispute over. Edited September 19, 2014 by Gordon R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun4860 Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 Thanks Gordon, I don't mind this topic continuing it's the argueing that has to stop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxie Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 It is the tax on that oil that governments want. Yes aris you`re right,but some people seem to think that governments physically own the actual oil and sell it to the oil companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 Yes aris you`re right,but some people seem to think that governments physically own the actual oil and sell it to the oil companies. I was of the opinion that all rights and ownership of minerals inc oil, gold etc are vested in the Crown and the Crown is, in effect, the government of the day. They then grant licences and charge 'royalties' for removal of the oil - the equipment (to extract the minerals) is in private ownership. In the USA, I believe mineral rights run with the ownership of the land on which they are found. Its then up to the landowner to do a deal for extraction or buy a derrick ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AULD YIN Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 aris - on the money about the tax. Show me a Government who isn't interested in revenue and I will show you a flying pig. Shaun - point taken - dispute over. Till the next. johnnie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmytree Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 Wouldn't it be good if the depth of feeling, passion and antagonism on all sides was directed at Westminster and the ruling elite who believe they're untouchable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxie Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 The oil companies pay for licences and then pay tax per barrel in the u.k.It makes you wonder if it might be better for the government to hire contractors to extract the oil and then sell the oil on the open market.Perhaps the cost of exploration and extraction is so vast that any government would not want to go down that route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
955i Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 graiglearn - you can wriggle all you want. You made allegations about the Chief Constable and his views on city dwellers and people who made a noise. Please publish your proof. Stop prattling on about a bloke you know or BASC. They have nothing to do with what you said. Will the pair of you stop having a ******* contest in the middle of an interesting thread!! If you want to squabble take it to PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun4860 Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 Will the pair of you stop having a ******* contest in the middle of an interesting thread!! If you want to squabble take it to PM It has been dealt with Thankyou Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts