Whichever Way Round You Like It, Just Vote No

BbFGnUuCUAA4se9I’m sure most of you seasoned indyref watchers like me have noticed that the No campaign tends to do something a little odd regarding who is funding who in this Union of supposed equals.

If speaking in isolation, the strategy is often to say that without funding from down south, Scotland would be in trouble. This leads to something like yesterday where Labour backbenchers appeared to cheer their belief  that Scotland is subsidised by the UK. In one way that could be construed as cheering the (perceived) weakness of your own country, perhaps not the seemliest thing for MSPs to be doing.

However, in other platforms, when the discussion seems to be that Scots contribute more to the UK than they get back, or that Scotland is doing better in some of the figures than much of England, then the No campaign strategy is to move to talking about redistributing wealth down south.

So to recap.

  • Scotland gets more, so we redistribute it south.
  • Scotland doesn’t have enough and needs to rely on England

Does anyone else see that those two can’t simultaneously go together?

Furthermore, if you look at the image above, if all this wealth had been being redistributed all around the country by successive Labour and Tory governments, keen to do their bit for the “regions”, I suspect that map would be rather different.

If however, as many would suggest, money from Scotland tends to go south and gets stuck there, it seems to make more sense, don’t you think?



  1. Hello very cool website!! Guy .. Excellent .. Superb .. I will bookmark your web site and take the feeds additionally?
    I’m happy to seek out numerous useful information here in the put up,
    we want develop more strategies in this regard, thank you for sharing.
    . . . . .

  2. I would like to see this map in more detail as I think using Scotland as a full region and splitting up so many english regions doesn’t represent what could be the true figures.

    I’m a Yes voter but sceptical about everything that’s put in front of me.

  3. Ms Lamont seemed to want to infer that Westminster funds all Public Expenditure in Scotland is paid for by Westminster and that all of it is good.

    Well first we need a definition the term Public Expenditure – “The expenditure incurred by public authorities like central, state and local governments to satisfy the collective social wants of the people”.

    Obviously my council taxes are part of Public Expenditure but do they get to the Council via Westminster? I thought they went direct.

    Then there is Defence Spending. That is part of Public Expenditure too, isn’t it? So it includes Trident? How does that satisfy collective social wants of the people?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s