Last night Ken Livingstone hosted the leaders of the political groups on London's Local Councils at City Hall. During his speech he was keen to emphasise the importance of building Crossrail to the whole of the UK's economy. His turn of phrase is unlikely to impress his friends in Holyrood:
"We need Crossrail to keep London's economy ticking over so that we can continue to pay for the Scottish to live the lifestyle to which they are accustomed."
Ouch. Do I feel another Standards Board referral coming on?
35 comments:
Socts? Where do they live then? 8-)
Oh my God!
How can you possibly comment on this? YOU have been banging on about this for that whole of the last month! Are you now admitting that you've been "Insulting the Scots"?
Ken Livingston..
*hic*..
London is crawling with Scots.
Don't they send their money home like other 3rd world workers?
I'm beginning to see why the newts like him so much.
Ken is no doubt positioning himself for something - we just need to figure out what.
Oh come on, it's obvious. He's gonna be the English Candidate for Labour leader.
I've always thought he might stand against Brown, right back to when he called for the Chancellor to be sacked over the Tube PPP.
Even if you don't like what he says and the way that he says it, it's always difficult to argue with the truth.
charming!
I disagree with so much that Red Ken says, so why does this strike a cord?
Go Ken Go.
He is only saying what many of us are thinking!
Hmmm ... Paul Linfor might have a case, actually.
On the other hand, maybe Ken made the remark on leaving a party, when he was tired and nervous.
- Anonymousette
I have to agree with jm. There is loads of anti-scottish feeling abroad in english blogs, yours included, and I think it is rather amusing to see this suddenly becoming an issue when it's hate-figure ken who articulates it. The only thing better would be gorgeous george saying it...
Does anyone else get the feeling that Ken Livingstone and George Galloway are getting dusty? Passé? Overtaken by events ...
- Anonymousette
The English have definitely overtaken us Scots as the biggest bunch of moaners in the UK. GET OVER IT! We rule you *evil Bond villain laugh*
That one must have come straight off the top of his 'barnet'
Seriously though, if the English think that Scotland is some utopian idyllic land of plenty as a result of us nicking all your taxable income then all you need to do is come up and visit - all your prejudices will be blown away with a quick visit to our inner cities!
Most of the money we have stolen off you has gone on that awful parliament that nobody likes and MSP's travel expenses.
BondWoman said above...
I have to agree with jm. There is loads of anti-scottish feeling abroad in english blogs, yours included
It's not a case of being anti Scottish (in the way we are about to see the Scots being hugely anti the English in the World Cup)-it is simply the case that the English and Welsh taxpayers are contributing hugely to the benefits enjoyed north of the border, e.g. free nursing home care, free university fees, free travel for the elderly, etc, etc, etc which are not available in England or Wales.
This is grossly inequitable and has to be addressed by the Scottish dominated Labour Westminister Cabinet
Was it not a Scotsman who privatised The Tube ? I hardly think he wants to attack Shriti Vadera whatever provenance she may have.
London is so full of Scotsmen in government and they have been nothing but a disaster each time the Scots have ruled England.
Livingston is a mental degenerate but noone will criticise him on this - they worked so hard to re-recruit him to Labour !
I've spent lots of time in Scotland and my other half is Scottish.
My part of England is like a third world country by comparison and our transport is much more expensive.
Our council tax has gone up almost 100% since Broon took over and by comparison, Scotland's has increased by only 40%
I wonder why Glasgow had an increase of ZERO PERCENT??? Especially when they've just decided to spend millions of English pounds on new buses for them!?
Then there's the free eye and dental checks, the free care for the elderly, free drugs a full 18 months before England is either allowed or denied them by NICE, the free national travel for the elderly, no top up fees, no foundation hospitals, LOWER COUNCIL TAXES, more spent per head of population on absolutely EVERYTHING IN SCOTLAND, than in England.
Why is that? Why? Why? Oh, yes, because the British government is actually the Scottish government and England is nothing more than the Bank of Scotland, being sucked dry for the benefit of Scottish votes, which amount to no more than the total votes in my English county!
Red Ken is right and even though I detest him, I'd certainly vote for him if he comes up to Yorkshire.
This comment erases all his other stupid comments.
The only effect one Independent State can have upon another Independent State is through the obligation and terms of a bi-lateral Treaty. This principle is embodied in Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, that states a “…party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.”
The UK Government draws upon its LEGAL BASIS from the Act of the Union.
Article 4 of the Act of Union states That all the subjects of the United Kingdom of Great Britain shall from and after the Union………have the same Rights Privileges and Advantages
The people of Scotland, since devolution, have had different rights, privileges and advantages over those of the people of England. The treaty of union is therefore null and void and England can withdraw using the provision of Article 61 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
Article 61 Supervening impossibility of performance
A party may invoke the impossibility of performing a treaty as a ground for terminating or withdrawing from it if the impossibility results from the permanent disappearance or destruction of an object indispensable for the execution of the treaty. If the impossibility is temporary, it may be invoked only as a ground for suspending the operation of the treaty.
That is the Answer to the West Lothian Question.
So Iain, are you going to explain why, when you point out that Scotland is subsidised by England, that's ok, but when Looney Ken does it, he's insulting Scots.
The Standards Board objects to politicians telling the truth? well, I suppose it is out of character. I just didn't realise it was forbidden by law.
Quick quiz. Who said this yesterday "Gordon could threaten to withdraw the Scottish monthly subsidy cheque!"
So Englandshire subsidises Scotchland then does it?
Oh aye and what would that be with then? Natural resources like Englandshire's massive North Sea oil reserves??? Erm maybe not.
What about Englandshire's massive financial sector - the best in the world? Erm not when The Royal Bank of Scotland and the Bank of Scotland have spent the last ten years buying up three of the biggest English based banks and headquartering them in Edinburgh. (Oh and Lloyds are now HQ'd in Edinburgh too)
How about exports, must be exports? Nope Scotland exports more per head of population than England!
So how is it that Englandshire subsidises Scotland? It doesn't! This myth is all utter rubbish peddled by generations of unionist Brit politicians who'd rather swan about in UK ministerial posts and pretend that anyone in the World actually gives a damn about "Britain" anymore.
If Scotland really was sponging off England don't you think that nice friend to Scotland, Mrs Thatcher would have privatised us years ago?! :)
It's a nice change to be able to totally agree with something Ken Livingstone has said. Through the iniquitous Barnett Formula the English - and that's mainly London, the South-East and East Anglia - subsidise the Scots to the tune of over 6 billion pounds a year. That's over 1000 pounds per Scot. This money isn't distributed according to economic need but rather according to where it can buy most votes. The sooner this 'formula' can be abolished the better.
Free university fees in Scotland? Bollocks. Free travel for the elderly? Aye after fulfilling a hundred stupid wee qualifications and even then you have to travel at stupid times. Free care for the elderly? How come lots of them get billed then and have to sell their houses!???
Council tax low? I live in a large town in a rural area and it costs me £200 a month for CT! That includes collecting my normal waste every FORTNIGHT not weekly.
Moray where I live has the lowest weekly wage in the country!
The money ain't going on the Highlands or elswhere up here, it is going on the fat dole living buggers in the central belt who waddle out every four/five years and vote for whichever monkey Labour has put up this time.
PS Good luck in the World Cup you chaps!
jm said...
So Iain, are you going to explain why, when you point out that Scotland is subsidised by England, that's ok, but when Looney Ken does it, he's insulting Scots.
Have you considered that Iain might have made that comment tongue in cheek?
I've just read that Broon says tuition fees will have to rise in "Britain"- they are to more than double, in line with the rest of Europe.
I bet he said this with a deadpan face, knowing full well that only England's students have to pay the tuition fees thanks to him and the rest of Scotland's MPs and that the opposition will not even mention that fact.
It's an affront to democracy. What a bunch of cowards and nasty minded racists we are governed by.
Yes it is terrible living in England where waiting lists are non-existent compared to Scotland, where the average age of a man in the biggest city is slightly more than 67.
I'd much rather live in Scotland described by those lovely chaps at the UN as the world's most violent place.
And really it is a bugger trying to get a deep fried Mars Bar this side of the border.
David H wrote - 'It's a nice change to be able to totally agree with something Ken Livingstone has said. Through the iniquitous Barnett Formula the English - and that's mainly London, the South-East and East Anglia - subsidise the Scots to the tune of over 6 billion pounds a year. That's over 1000 pounds per Scot.
Bet you can't back up that claim.
With the entire UK in fiscal deficit and the gap being met somewhat by oil revenues it's a bit of a stretch saying that those taxes come from the south.
Perhaps you can explain how a percieved fiscal deficit for Scotland is a subsidy from southern England yet an actual fiscal deficit partly met by oil revenues mostly off Scotland is not?
The mayor's remarks also infuriated Alex Salmond, the Scottish National Party leader, who yesterday introduced a bill calling for the repatriation of North Sea oil reserves to Scotland.
Mr Salmond said: "When you include all Scotland's resources, we subsidise the rest of the UK by £3,000 a year for the average Scottish family."
This "£200 billion raid" on Scottish resources over 30 years was "the greatest act of international larceny since the Spanish stole the Inca gold", he said.
Ken is a self-serving egomaniac. However, on this one he's spot on. Why the 'ouch', Brother Dale?
This whole squabble about who subsidises who would go away if the Union was to become a true federation. The English would get their own parliament, like the Celtic Cousins, and each would be resonsible for their own internal affairs (including raising sufficient revenue).
The Westminster parliament could then be much reduced in size with the seats divvied up on a more equitable basis than now (the Scots get more MP per head than the English remember).
Westminster would then deal solely with matters affecting the Union as a whole (defence, foreign affairs etc) and be responsible for raising the necessary revenue for those responsibilities only.
Clear seperation of powers and responsibilities including the raising of revenue. That's the answer.
Of course the current government will never suggest such a course because it would permenantly loose England to the Tories and without the ability to bribe the Celts with English gold would probably loose them as well.
RM
A lot of the reason for London being wealthier than Scotland is not that Ken runs it so much more competently than Scottish Labour or indeed that the Scots in London are so much more competent than the Scots in Scotland but because Westminster is there. Thus not only is London top heavy with First Division civil servants but with the head offices of all big companies that want to schmooze with government (ie almost all of them).
In the event that Ken leads the oppressed Londoners to secede from the union he might find this a problem.
Blair Snub to Scotland Over Livingstone's Anti-Scottish Outburst
westminster
SNP MP, Mike Weir has today (Wednesday) challenged the Prime Minister at PMQs over remarks by Labour London Mayor Ken Livingstone, who claimed London kept Scots in 'the lifestyle to which they are accustomed'.
Mr Weir has published research detailing the true scale of government investment in London, including £26 billion in projects ranging from the Olympics to Crossrail. The paper also highlights a £280 million annual subsidy resulting from the disproportionate level of high-wage senior civil service positions in the UK capital.
At PMQ's today Mr Weir asked:
"The Prime Minister may have seen the remarks by his colleague, the Labour Mayor of London, that Crossrail is necessary for Scotland "to live the lifestyle to which they are accustomed".
"Isn't this something of a brass neck considering this year £12 billion of Scottish oil revenues are enabling the Prime Minister's government to live in the style to which they have become accustomed."
Commenting on the Prime Minister's reply Mr Weir said:
"Tony Blair totally failed to distance himself from Labour Mayor, Ken Livingstone's inaccurate remarks. There is now little doubt that Labour have resurrected their 1999 tactic to 'engender fear' and this now includes smears about the true state of UK finances.
"The Prime Minister's response was true to type as he resorted to scaremongering and empty attacks on Scotland and the SNP. Tony Blair can bluster and try to talk Scotland down, but he cannot hide the fact that this year we are subsdising the rest of the UK to the tune of £800 for every man, woman and child in Scotland."
SNP Leader Alex Salmond MP has responded to the Mayor's remarks by calling on the Scots in London to withdraw their support from Ken Livingstone at the ballot box. Speaking on BBC London this morning Mr Salmond warned: "Ken Livingstone's rainbow coalition has just lost its tartan"
Commenting Mr Salmond said:
"Ken Livingstone should think twice before taking any more swipes at Scotland. With thousands of Scots living and voting in London, he should spend less time cracking anti-Scottish jokes, or it'll be the London Scots who have the last laugh at the ballot box.
"Ken is also completely wrong about the funding balance. It is the height of irony that he chose to make such uninformed remarks on the day the SNP introduced a Bill in the House of Commons to bring home to Scotland the billions in oil revenue that are keeping Gordon Brown's Treasury afloat.
"When you include all Scotland's resources, we subsidise the rest of the UK to the tune of £800 for every person living in Scotland."
ENDS
Notes: Research on London subsidies and Scottish oil revenues is printed below.
London's Secret Subsidy
1. Livingstone's London fantasy
London Mayor, Ken Livingstone has claimed that London needs Crossrail "to keep London's economy ticking over so that we can continue to pay for the Scottish to live the lifestyle to which they are accustomed." This flawed analysis fails to take into account the money that flows from Scotland to the rest of the UK and ignores the extra investment and secret subsidies for the UK's capital city – money that pumps billions into the London economy.
2. Olympic sized subsidies
London is the UK's main beneficiary of so-called 'national' spending. In the last 10 years alone, the British capital has been awarded a jaw-dropping £26 billion for a range of projects:
* London 2012 - £1.75 billion in funding from the lottery or general taxation
* Crossrail - £13.9 billion to £14.8 billion
* Channel Tunnel rail link - £5.2 billion
* Jubilee line extension - £3.2 billion
* British Library - £0.5 billion
* DLR extension - £0.5 billion
* East London line extension - £0.8 billion
3. Britain's London bias
We know from a series of parliamentary answers at the beginning of 2006 that the additional costs for Scottish taxpayers of employing people in London compared to Scotland is £146 million – shown in the higher salaries paid in the UK's capital.
Not only do our public servants get paid more for working in the high-wage south-east, more of the highest paid roles are based in the capital. Again government figures show that 63% of the senior civil service is based in London, bringing a further boost of £135 million to that city's economy .
Similarly for 11 departments providing breakdowns for their core functions, 74.7% of the government's rates bills is spent in a handful of central London council areas, that is £39.3 million of spending.
4. The £800 a head annual cost of Britain
The Chancellor himself has forecast oil revenues this year of £10 billion.
At current world oil prices this is likely to rise to £12.5 billion. That means almost £1 billion a month is flowing from the Scottish sector of the North Sea straight into the London exchequer. As a result, this year, Scotland is in relative surplus compared to the UK by some £4 billion – equivalent to every Scot sending south £800 a year.
I wonder how England will fare when Trident is repatriated to them, on independence? Perhaps Ken can find a nice wee patch of Hyde Park to replicate the necessary infrastructure to support them? Oh and England can pay for it if it wants them! I will however sit back and watch with relish. Well the English say they are not cowards, this will be the test.
Post a Comment