The UK - better together!

[Jason]

Fearful little fucking Englanders running a fear inspired propaganda campaign designed to instil fear.

[mistermack]

Just one example of small-is-shit was on the tv today.
Various NHS trusts were compared, in how much they pay for supplies. Some were paying more than DOUBLE what others were paying for the same items. Either some buyers are being conned, or they are part of the con, and getting kickbacks.

Yet we were sold the idea of trusts, on the so-called principle that local is better than national. More effiecient, more responsive to local needs. What bollocks. A NATIONAL buying and distribution system would get the best deals, and share resources, making everything more efficient.

Sure, someone might still try it on, but the hurdles are higher and penalties bigger with a national system.

Something very similar has happened with schools. They gave head-teachers the power to control their own spending. What happened? Some quickly got taken to the cleaners by fraudsters, as was exposed on Panorama. They were paying ten times the normal prices for computers, which turned out to be rubbish.
Then the fraudsters went bust, cancelling the maintenance contracts, and started up again with new names. They made millions.

This is the sort of thing that goes on, when you follow this mantra of "local is better".
There is no logic behind it, it's not true, and it costs a fortune, because you lose that expertise of big organisations. You don't get Shell or BMW splitting everything up into little autonomous cells.

Local is nearly always worse. FACT.

[klr]

Meanwhile, the Welsh watch the conflicts unfold and quietly draw up their plans...

Actually, they are doing just that - as it so happens:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-20393424

Serious consideration will be given to a report calling for Wales to have its own tax system, the UK government says.

The Silk Commission says a referendum should be held on allowing the Welsh government to vary income tax.

Welsh Secretary David Jones said work would begin straight away to decide which, if any, of the report's proposals are introduced.

The report says the two governments should share responsibility for income tax but only if voters agree.

Mr Jones said an analysis of the Silk report would start immediately and that his department had already spoken to the Treasury and First Minister Carwyn Jones.

...

[Pappa]

Meanwhile, the Welsh watch the conflicts unfold and quietly draw up their plans...

There's not much support for full independence in Wales. I think most people support further political autonomy and more law-making powers, but that's as far as it goes.

[Jesus_of_Nazareth]

Because it's not like Scotland with full control over it's own decisions and resources couldn't take a different path from that imposed from the UK, and therefore grow the economy ... no siree bob.

Carry on ...

Actually I think that is the crux of the matter - and IMO the BIG reason for independence.

No guarantee that the Scotland alone won't make a complete horlicks of the post oil economy (remember, it is the country that gave us Gordon Brown, Alastair Darling and Rudolf Hess ) - but one thing that is certain is that England won't even try. and even if they did the same chances of success (in theory - in practice given past performance very little).

The BIG question is what does England do when the oil runs out?........in 2014 .

[ronmcd]

Just one example of small-is-shit was on the tv today.
Various NHS trusts were compared, in how much they pay for supplies. Some were paying more than DOUBLE what others were paying for the same items. Either some buyers are being conned, or they are part of the con, and getting kickbacks.

Yet we were sold the idea of trusts, on the so-called principle that local is better than national. More effiecient, more responsive to local needs. What bollocks. A NATIONAL buying and distribution system would get the best deals, and share resources, making everything more efficient.

Sure, someone might still try it on, but the hurdles are higher and penalties bigger with a national system.

Something very similar has happened with schools. They gave head-teachers the power to control their own spending. What happened? Some quickly got taken to the cleaners by fraudsters, as was exposed on Panorama. They were paying ten times the normal prices for computers, which turned out to be rubbish.
Then the fraudsters went bust, cancelling the maintenance contracts, and started up again with new names. They made millions.

This is the sort of thing that goes on, when you follow this mantra of "local is better".
There is no logic behind it, it's not true, and it costs a fortune, because you lose that expertise of big organisations. You don't get Shell or BMW splitting everything up into little autonomous cells.

Local is nearly always worse. FACT.

There are valid arguments about local decision making, you make an argument that local doesnt always mean better or economical. Fine.

But here is a valid counter argument, one situation where local IS better. The Scottish NHS is centrally organised, with integrated commissioning, and no privatisation, and is local in the sense of being independent of Westminister. It is completely independent of the NHS systems in each of the other nations in UK (they are all independent I believe?). If your blanket assumption that local=bad and larger centralised=good, then we in Scotland would have the Lansley model for healthcare. And you cant even use the argument that the English system is saving money - it is burning money to "reform" (hahahahaha ... sob) the system, make millionaires from doctors who created commissioning groups, after which the control will not be in the hands of the politicians and they can deny responsibility.

One other thing ... as Westminister attempts to reduce funding on police, on NHS, etc, those reductions feed into the Scottish funding system through the Barnett formula. So the switch in university funding from government to students in England reduces the education budget in Scotland (even though we dont want to follow that model), and similarly if the English NHS funding falls in Scotland our funding will fall even though we are doing something completely different.

No, centralised is not always better. As local is not always better. There is a balance, and it depends on circumstance.

[klr]

At the rates these threads are starting, Scottish Independence may need its own sub-forum here.

Which is a bit ironic, if you think about it.

[ronmcd]

Because it's not like Scotland with full control over it's own decisions and resources couldn't take a different path from that imposed from the UK, and therefore grow the economy ... no siree bob.

Carry on ...

Actually I think that is the crux of the matter - and IMO the BIG reason for independence.

No guarantee that the Scotland alone won't make a complete horlicks of the post oil economy (remember, it is the country that gave us Gordon Brown, Alastair Darling and Rudolf Hess ) - but one thing that is certain is that England won't even try. and even if they did the same chances of success (in theory - in practice given past performance very little).

The BIG question is what does England do when the oil runs out?........in 2014 .

Yup. It's definitely one reason I am interested in independence, and to a lesser degree why I was originally interested in full fiscal autonomy, but thats off the table now. Which is a shame.

I'm also ... um ... sceptical to say the least whenever someone like Darling claims the oil is running out so it's all going to be a disaster. When the McCrone report was buried in the 1970's because it showed that Scotland would be ... well, like Norway by now ... and kept hidden by successive governments including the last Labour government ... I'm inexplicably suspicious It would still be buried now if it werent for Freedom of Information, and is surprisingly little known about even though it has been available since 2005.

The oil is running out! they have claimed in the 70's, 80's, 90's ... and guess what? It's going to be a significant source of revenue for someone for the next 40 years plus. The only danger to North Sea oil was an idiotic Osbourne imposing a cash grab on the oil companies in his first year at the treasury, killing investment instantly. It's only recovering now. Ex oil economist Salmond was NOT best pleased with that decision I seem to remember, and he was proven correct.
(that'll bring the Eck haters ... )

[ronmcd]

At the rates these threads are starting, Scottish Independence may need its own sub-forum here.

Which is a bit ironic, if you think about it.

Ha.

Not sure why this isn't just merged with the last one, tbh.

[ronmcd]

One quick point, in a thread I wanted to avoid posting in ... what do we REALLY think the UK treasury and Whitehall think about the prospect of losing:

- 90% North Sea oil revenues
- whisky industry revenues
- nuclear submarine base and weapons storage a suitable distance from civilisation (London)
- Scotland's renewable energy potential, without which UK cannot meet it's renewables targets
- one of the most economically productive regions with UK
- deep fried mars bars

Serious business. (apart from the mars bars)

[Red Celt]

Made me smile... (see?)

[Audley Strange]

I say move the capitol to Glasgow and let the English have an independence movement for a change.

Fucking ace idea.

[Red Celt]

If you are British (or not) and you support the continuation of the Union as opposed to an independent Scotland there is a 'Better Together' campaign which promotes the positive side of the union. Linky:-

http://bettertogether.net/pages/the-ve-case

And in other news, Rum suggests that Mr & Mrs Lizon stay married, because they're both "Better Together". Well, it was only 10 years of abuse, after all. Mr Lizon is apparently happy with Rum's suggestion. Mrs Lizon... not so much. She told him that she is better able to look after herself, which resulted in Rum calling her a Nationalist.

[ronmcd]

Better Together!


Source

[Coito ergo sum]

Since folks over there are so enlightened that stuff like "nationalism" is passe', why does it matter to people there whether one bit of land is its own nation or not? Shouldn't ya'll just be like "meh...nations...that's so last century! We'll just not worry about such banal and trivial things..."?