Latest news with #BarnettFormula
The National
2 days ago
- Politics
- The National
Westminster, not the SNP, can take credit for increased Yes support
After the disappointment of 2014, rather than a general sense of defeat there was an amazing upsurge in the demand for change, and SNP membership exploded. Political meetings were packed and Yes groups were energised, so why didn't the party build on that enthusiasm? READ MORE: Stephen Flynn clashes with Labour MP in BBC interview: 'Don't talk over me' The British establishment got a real fright when the results of the referendum were so unexpectedly close, and determined that it would never happen again. This establishment is fanatical in retaining and defending the status quo, because it guarantees the power and wealth of entitled elites and their lackeys – monarchy, aristocracy, oligarchy, and their misguided defenders. The powerful people who are members of the establishment have no limits to, or scruples about, the illegal methods they will employ to keep things as they are. We have witnessed this when countries tried to leave the Empire, and with reform of the House of Lords which will only happen over their dead bodies. So I am going to answer my question with another one. What dire consequences has the sinister dark state threatened the SNP with if they continue to campaign for independence? Richard Walthew Melrose I'M not surprised that the SNP leadership are ignoring the voices of members or even independence supporters – they didn't get where they are by listening to anyone else. So it comes as no shock to find out that the SNP won't get involved in an independence convention – not for them to try to bring together the various parties, groups, organisations and people who all want independence. They know best. This is the same attitude that has seen independence campaigning stall since October 2014. Eleven years of doing nothing to promote the cause or build widespread support. Occasionally saying 'independence' but not relating it to our current political and economic problems. READ MORE: Seamus Logan: If the SNP didn't exist, we would have to invent it Of course they can say we would be better off if we were independent and had the full resources of our nation to tackle issues like poverty. Yes, they can complain about successive Westminster governments cheating Scotland out of Barnett Formula funding – but you know who is really to blame for this? The SNP leadership who have ignored mandate after mandate, who have failed to link independence with a positive future for all Scots. In 2014 most independence supporters came together – they may have had different ideas about the future of Scotland but they all agreed independence was our key aim. That is gone thanks to the incompetence of the SNP leadership. When you have someone like Angus Robertson happy to meet secretly with representatives of the rogue state of Israel but unwilling to meet with independence campaigners, you know there is something rotten in the SNP leadership. It's time they were all gone. Alex Beckett Paisley THANKS to the SNP's website I was able to download and read both of John Swinney's recent speeches. Tuesday's speech, to the 2050 event, was titled 'Putting Scotland's Future in Scotland's Hands' and consisted of 2178 words. The word independence appears twice. READ MORE: Independence campaigners react to John Swinney speech on independence Monday's speech was on the topic on 'National Renewal' and consisted of 3616 words. I could not find the word 'independence' once. I read it again. I still could not find it. I think it's safe to make some assumptions based on these facts. Brian Lawson Paisley THE SNP National Council meeting in Perth on Saturday must show an urgency for change. Delegates must not be lectured to by the same team of professional punters that produced the debacle of Hamilton. Rather the party delegates must be given a chance to express grassroots opinion. 'Rousing' and John Swinney hardly go together, but this is his last chance prior to conference. READ MORE: The SNP's current strategy is political suicide – what needs to change Hopefully it just might not be necessary to pluck from our history the nickname given to another John, Balliol the 13th-century monarch. He was gleefully called 'Toom Tabard' (empty coat) as he was seen as a political vassal of English power. But our John is an honourable man and just might do the honourable thing, not by resigning, but by inspiring and igniting the party. Thom Cross Carluke THE long letter by James Cassidy (Jun 15) is interesting reading, however in it he writes: '...in the then political climate, a huge amount of SNP list votes were being taken out of the game under the D'Hondt system'. Getting independence for Scotland is no 'game'. The reduction of SNP list votes was NOT a result of the d'Hondt system – it was entirely due to section 7(2) of the Scotland Act 1998. This reduction, of more than one million votes, was calculated BEFORE application of the d'Hondt divisor – this is a verifiable fact. I am personally opposed to the d'Hondt system, both in the way it is used for elections to the Scottish Parliament and in its normal operation, as it is known to be the least proportional of all proportional-representation systems. That has been known about for at least 31 years and possibly even 55 years ago when I first learned about it. Michael Follon Glenrothes
Telegraph
3 days ago
- Business
- Telegraph
Scotland's rubbish is England's only reward
What does the rest of the UK get in return for the 'Union dividend' – currently totalling £52 billion – the sum that Scotland receives from the UK taxpayers to help persuade it to remain part of Britain? Around 100 truckloads of rubbish to be dumped at various landfill sites throughout the North of England seems a likely answer. Despite the extra cash received by the SNP government being arguably a fair old 'bung' – the product of the four decades-old Barnett formula – the payback is shaping up to be many thousands of black bags, including commercial waste, to be sent to the likes of Cumbria and Northumberland because of SNP incompetence or arrogance. They're to be heading south because the Scottish Government does not want its green and pleasant acres spoiled by any more rubbish being buried at landfill sites north of the border after December 31. We are not talking here about just the odd black bag. One waste expert told BBC Scotland that it would require between 80 and 100 trucks running seven days per week to move up to 600,000 tons to English landfills. The only real alternative to landfill is incineration, but SNP ministers have halted the building of any more incinerators because they can't afford them, even if they're receiving what's been described as a record £52 billion 'war chest' for use in the Scottish Parliament election campaign next May. I suspect the public will find that a hard one to swallow. Energy minister Gillian Martin blamed inflation and higher material costs for the hold-up in building new incinerators, but she also cited 'outside factors' for the delay – usual SNP code to signal that the government in London is to blame. And Ms Martin didn't apologise for the fact that the lack of incinerators might last another three years, saying that getting rid of landfill sites in Scotland 'far outweighs' any downsides that might arise from sending the rubbish over the border. But as any fair-minded person might ask: who will pick up the bills? In financial terms it is Scottish business leaders who will have to pay for the trucking of their commercial waste to landfill sites in England. And in environmental terms, I can't imagine that the northern English will be overjoyed at receiving all of this Scottish muck. The whole project is an example of nationalist insensitivity at best or arrogance at worst. Many Scots are too ready to see insults – real or imagined – in the words and actions of the English yet refuse to take care when it comes to their southern neighbours' feelings. Speaking as a Scot I was pleased to see criticism of this stupid affair emanating from most parts of the political spectrum. The Lib Dems' Liam McArthur, who is the party's climate spokesman, accused the SNP of planning to make England 'their dumping ground for waste'. The Tories' Douglas Lumsden said there should be 'red faces all round among SNP ministers at this news'. I doubt if he'll get his wish, because of that other piece of embarrassing news – regarding the Scottish headteacher who banned pupils from bringing Union flags to school as they were deemed to be potentially offensive or sectarian. The flags had been brought to school for a special end of term event and the head's action in effectively banning the United Kingdom's flag provoked a storm of criticism, after she had told pupils that their action had been 'contrary to the school's values of respect and kindness.' The local council, East Renfrewshire, has issued an apology, but that hasn't prevented Jackson Carlaw, a local MSP and former Scottish Tory leader, from saying that to equate the Union flag with sectarianism was 'totally unacceptable and deeply offensive'. There has been no response from the SNP on this issue but then anyone who knows anything about the party will know that a large proportion of its members and supporters hate the Union flag; indeed many call it 'the butcher's apron'. Following his humiliating loss to Labour in the recent by-election, First Minister John Swinney has sought to keep his troops happy with yet another speech promising that he'd fight for independence. However when it comes to flags, as well as black bags, it seems his party is determined to get nothing right.
The Guardian
5 days ago
- Business
- The Guardian
Rachel Reeves accused of leaving devolved nations in red after NICs rise
Rachel Reeves has been accused of shortchanging the UK's devolved nations after leaving the Welsh, Scottish and northern Irish governments with multimillion-pound funding gaps. The chancellor said the Treasury would fully cover the 1.2% rise in national insurance contributions for employers on salaries above £5,000, which came in on 6 April. However, Reeves has calculated the amount of money needed by using the Barnett formula, which ensures funding increases proportional to England in terms of population. Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast – which all operate larger public sectors than England – now say they have been left in the red. The Celtic nations' finance officials have argued the move violates the UK's statement of funding policy, which states each constituent government is not allowed to act in a way that creates adverse financial implications for the others. The Welsh cabinet secretary for finance, Mark Drakeford, announced last week that the Welsh government would use £36m annually, taken from its reserves, to plug half the gap, but a further £36m would have to be funded by public sector employers, including health boards, all 22 local councils, Natural Resources Wales and Cardiff airport. The funding shortage amounts to cuts across the board of about 14%. Drakeford said: 'We have made our position very clear with the Treasury that using the Barnett formula in this instance is a breach of the rules. If this was a one-off, we may have been able to use more of our reserves to cover the shortfall, but as it is, this will unfairly impact Wales year after year.' The bill for Scotland's public services amounts to an estimated £700m, and about £200m in northern Ireland. The Treasury has agreed an additional £339m for Edinburgh and £146m for Belfast. Scotland's budget is already under significant pressure from the rising cost of devolved welfare benefits, public sector pay settlements, and new policy commitments – including the mitigation of the two-child limit. Holyrood's finance secretary, Shona Robison, has called repeatedly for the tax increase to be fully funded by the UK government. She said: 'We have been calling for the UK government to abandon its employer national insurance rise, which risks damaging the economy by making it harder for businesses to take on or keep staff. 'Failing that, we have asked that they fully fund this tax increase to ensure Scotland's NHS, councils and other public services don't lose out on vital revenue. 'As such, it is deeply disappointing that the funding falls so far short of the more than £700m bill we estimate public services face. It feels like Scotland is now being punished for having decided to employ more people in the public sector and to invest in key public services.' The UK government has defended the use of the Barnett formula in calculating public sector national insurance contributions. A spokesperson said the changes were 'in line with agreed funding arrangements and longstanding precedent'. However, the row has reignited a longstanding debate over whether the Barnett formula – in use since 1978 – is fit for purpose, and whether it should be reformed or scrapped in favour of a universal needs-based approach. It also adds to growing friction between the Welsh Labour and UK Labour administrations. Wales has consistently voted Labour for 100 years, and Welsh Labour has controlled the Senedd since its inception in 1999. However, with a year to go before the next Welsh elections, recent polling has suggested the party will trail in third place behind Plaid Cymru and Reform UK, with just 18% of votes, putting the first minister and Welsh Labour leader, Eluned Morgan, under pressure to differentiate her wing of the party from its Westminster counterpart. Rory Carroll contributed reporting
North Wales Chronicle
5 days ago
- Business
- North Wales Chronicle
FUW give evidence to Westminster's Welsh Affairs Committee
Last week the Farmers' Union of Wales welcomed the opportunity to present evidence to Westminster's Welsh Affairs Committee inquiry into the challenges and opportunities facing farming in Wales in 2025. The FUW was represented by our Head of Policy, Gareth Parry, who was questioned by MPs on a number of the ongoing challenges facing Welsh agriculture; including the UK's withdrawal from the European Union, the changes to agricultural and business property relief and how changes to the UK Government's funding for Welsh agriculture will impact the sustainability of the sector. As part of the session, the FUW highlighted the impact the UK's departure from the EU has had due to the loss of the intermediate-term stability provided by the EU's seven year Multiannual Financial Framework. The lack of such replacement financial frameworks has allowed the UK Government to apply the Barnett Formula to any future adjustments to Welsh agricultural funding, meaning that Wales will receive subsequent uplifts based on a historical share of the UK population as opposed to rural needs. Beyond the uncertainty regarding future farm funding, the FUW also highlighted how successive UK governments' appetite to sign trade agreements with other countries has undermined domestic food production. These agreements threaten to pull the rug from beneath Welsh farmers by reforming agricultural policies and replacing domestic food production with imports, with little consideration of the economic viability of Welsh farming businesses. Several questions during the session focused on the proposed inheritance tax reforms, with Mr Parry relaying the latest figures from Family Business UK and CBI Economics on the potential impacts for the UK economy. In summary, the report suggests that the reduction in business activity will lead to a loss in Gross Value Added (GVA) of £14.8 billion over the next five years. These latest figures again demonstrate HM Treasury's failure to consider the wider economic and social impacts of the proposed changes, and far-reaching implications on Welsh family farms and the economy. Frustratingly, it's been clear since the Budget announcement that HM Treasury Officials have had no intention of even acknowledging our concerns. They have slammed the door on the industry and appear to have thrown away the key. It remains the case that the FUW are not calling for the policy to be scrapped, however we continue to seek an opportunity to design a policy with HM Treasury that works for genuine family farms whilst closing the loopholes that currently exist.
Rhyl Journal
5 days ago
- Business
- Rhyl Journal
FUW give evidence to Westminster's Welsh Affairs Committee
Last week the Farmers' Union of Wales welcomed the opportunity to present evidence to Westminster's Welsh Affairs Committee inquiry into the challenges and opportunities facing farming in Wales in 2025. The FUW was represented by our Head of Policy, Gareth Parry, who was questioned by MPs on a number of the ongoing challenges facing Welsh agriculture; including the UK's withdrawal from the European Union, the changes to agricultural and business property relief and how changes to the UK Government's funding for Welsh agriculture will impact the sustainability of the sector. As part of the session, the FUW highlighted the impact the UK's departure from the EU has had due to the loss of the intermediate-term stability provided by the EU's seven year Multiannual Financial Framework. The lack of such replacement financial frameworks has allowed the UK Government to apply the Barnett Formula to any future adjustments to Welsh agricultural funding, meaning that Wales will receive subsequent uplifts based on a historical share of the UK population as opposed to rural needs. Beyond the uncertainty regarding future farm funding, the FUW also highlighted how successive UK governments' appetite to sign trade agreements with other countries has undermined domestic food production. These agreements threaten to pull the rug from beneath Welsh farmers by reforming agricultural policies and replacing domestic food production with imports, with little consideration of the economic viability of Welsh farming businesses. Several questions during the session focused on the proposed inheritance tax reforms, with Mr Parry relaying the latest figures from Family Business UK and CBI Economics on the potential impacts for the UK economy. In summary, the report suggests that the reduction in business activity will lead to a loss in Gross Value Added (GVA) of £14.8 billion over the next five years. These latest figures again demonstrate HM Treasury's failure to consider the wider economic and social impacts of the proposed changes, and far-reaching implications on Welsh family farms and the economy. Frustratingly, it's been clear since the Budget announcement that HM Treasury Officials have had no intention of even acknowledging our concerns. They have slammed the door on the industry and appear to have thrown away the key. It remains the case that the FUW are not calling for the policy to be scrapped, however we continue to seek an opportunity to design a policy with HM Treasury that works for genuine family farms whilst closing the loopholes that currently exist.
