Tuesday, 8 December 2015

SNP Gives £12 million to help Flood Victims in Africa. You Couldn't Make It Up.

At a time when the North of England has just been hit by some of the worst flooding imaginable, and entire counties are underwater, the Scottish Nationalist Party has decided to send £12 million of emergency aid to flood victims in Africa.

Flood Aid

What an insult to the distressed, miserable, marooned and deluged inhabitants of Cumbria.  What a slap in the face for the people, many of them now homeless and nearly hopeless, surveying the water-logged wrecks of their house and possessions, just before Christmas too.
Nicola Sturgeon calls this a "climate justice fund". I call it downright THEFT.

Image result for Cumbria floods 2015

This tax money comes from England, Because of the enduring injustice of the Barnett Formula and the inequitable policies of successive governments, we pay £ billions more to Scotland than they contribute, billions more than we get for our own needs in England. Then when English people are in need, do the Scots help us?  Not a bit of it. They spit in our face. 


Image result for Cumbria floods 2015


In Cumbria people are already having to launch "appeals" for charity money. They should not have to beg.  It should be their right to have help from our own government. There should be a sizeable emergency fund for them to draw on, and there would be if our policies were  not so mad.

And when are the wonderful friends we are supposed to have in the EU going to offer a penny to help us cope with this major crisis? So far they have not rushed to do so. They have been silent. Mr Junker, Mrs Merkel, where are you? You were very vociferous when demanding more and more billions from us every year. 


With some people, generosity and friendship are a one-way street.






http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/624687/SNP-12million-flood-aid-Africa

29 comments:

  1. Our sympathies go out to all involved in the floods. We at DriTech would like to offer our flood restoration services to those affected. We will repair everything we can within your property. Please call 0800 865 4999 for more information.

    ReplyDelete
  2. best check how much westminster gives away in foreign aid first

    ReplyDelete
  3. and westminster gives away how much in foreign aid?

    ReplyDelete
  4. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35020463 Get your facts right.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please re-phrase your message phrased in a more polite way without being rude and aggressive. As it is, I will have to delete it. This goes for other people as well.

      Delete
  6. I repeat to other commenters, express your view without rudeness and aggression or it will not be posted.
    Several have been deleted for this reason. This is in fact the most frequent reason why comments do not appear.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Julia you need to get the facts right I'm afraid, I have friends in Cumbria who have been badly affected by this, and everyone there deserves and should be getting help, from YOUR OWN government, but to post this as it is, is wrong, firstly it is a fund that has been running for years, it is to do with climate change and it was already going through when the storms hit Cumbria, it is also 12 million split over 4 years, I wholeheartedly agree that these people should be first to be helped from the British government, but your whole angle is a very anti Scottish view and I am sure will upset many people in Scotland who will have been willing to do what they can to help the victims of these floods.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well put Bruce. I think the post comes across as very anti scottish for absolutely no apparent reason whatsoever! It is a good thing that Scotland is contributing to a GLOBAL issue. Politics is starting to become a global matter, people cannot silo themselves into neat little countries now.

      Delete
  8. Scots elected the SNP so I hold them responsible for the SNP's decisions. when the Scottish government offers financial help please post the news here. Numerous flood barrier schemes have been cut in England to save money while Obsorne's latest autumn mini-budget award £billions more to Scotland than to England.
    I am equally critical of the fact that we in the UK have been forced, via the EU, to pay immense sums to build flood defences in Serbia - despite the fact that we cannot protect our own citizens from this recurrent disaster.
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/626379/Serbia-s-flood-defences-paid-for-by-YOU-while-at-home-Cumbria-is-devastated-by-floods

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What complete nonsense. The Scottish Government has been providing financial help for Scots for years, due to Westminster policies. Thank you SNP for my free education, prescriptions, council tax freeze and no bedroom tax.

      So my point to you is when we are trying to combat as much Westminster crap as possible, why would we give money back to a Government who is hell bent on taking absolutely everything away us? Our oil industry, our renewable industries, a high speed rail link that goes absolutely nowhere near Scotland, and yet we are still paying MILLIONS in tax for it.

      Delete
    2. You say "The Scottish Government has been providing financial help for Scots for years". I quite agree. Where did I say otherwise?
      I have been opposing HS2 for years actually.

      Delete
  9. Well Julia, since the majority of English folk voted for the UK govt I hold you you responsible for all the wrongdoing that the UK govt has and is doing. Yes it might sound ridiculous, but it's no more ridiculous than what you're saying. As said above, get your facts right. Scotland pays into the UK govt more than it gets back, like it or not THAT'S A FACT. You're anti Scottish, but we're used to that up her.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Well if you call it anti-Scottish to write a blog post criticizing one policy of the SNP when I have often criticized other parties you have got a short fuse.
    I would also like to point out that the majority of English people did not actually vote for the Conservatives - they got in on about 25%.
    Your claim that Scotland pays more into the UK exchequer than it gets back does not become true just because you put it in capital letters. That is the equivalent of shouting.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  12. And a message to many other would-be commenters:
    What part of "rude or aggressive comments will be deleted" don't you understand?
    Rude includes the following:
    Profanities, inappropriate anatomical language, accusations of ignorance, or other general insults.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Julia before you posted this blog you should have checked your facts ! Especially the ones concerning the Barnet formula & whom pays in more between the whole of the U.K. That would be Scotland.The aid sent to Africa is and has been ongoing before any floods came into play in Cumbria - perhaps you should look at your own government before pointing the finger at the snp.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Poorly researched knee jerk rhetoric blaming the Scottish government for fulfilling their promises to others.
    Scotland is far less anti-English than you'd like us to be

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What do you mean, "you'd like us to be"? Basically we can't win against your Scottish logic. If we want you to stay in the union, we're oppressing you. If we don't want you that's rejecting you. The fact is that per head Scottish people get far more money spent on them that English people do.

      Delete
  15. Julia if Scotland is such a waste of Englands resourses why did the Westminster Gov fight so hard for a no vote !!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I said it got a lot of resources, not that it is necessarily a "waste" but that it is unjust.

      Delete
  16. Ok I can say it without shouting. The net balance of money is flowing from Scotland to the UK, not the other way round. Why else would the establishment, including the bbc, pull out every dirty trick in the book to prevent independence?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is a very good question, and since I don't accept your premises I find it very puzzling. Maybe we are ruled by idiots. Certainly the UK is ruled Scotsmen - Cameron, Gordon Broon, Blair. And right now we have an absurdly high number of Scottish MPs representing fewer voters than live in Yorkshire. Doesn't seem very fair to me.

      Delete
  17. Your article is hugely ill-informed.

    What, precisely, have you based this on?

    I suspect that, like so many folk in England, you believe the nonsense fed to you by the media, which completely misses the fact that there are two sides to a balance sheet. There is more public spending per head in Scotland than in England, but Scots raise more per head than the average for England, which still leaves Scotland contributing more than it gets back from Westminster, and this has been the case for the last 30 years since the comparison was being made. Only London and the south east of England generate more tax per head.

    There is also the issue of there being more privately funded services in England, which contributes to the figures. If I was English, I'd be asking why you have to pay twice for so many of your services. What are your politicians doing?

    So, let's look at the funding for Scotland! The problem is that the only available figures that we have to go on, Government Expenditure & Revenues Scotland (GERS), are generally estimates, based on Scotland's population share of the UK of around 8.4%. This means that, say, looking at defence spending of £33 billion, for example, GERS apportions roughly (I don't have a calculator to hand) £3 billion to Scotland. However, there isn't actually £3 billion spent in Scotland; it's actually around £2 billion. Consequently, the figures don't take into account that this spending is actually made in England, with the knock-on effect of the service and civilian personnel paying their taxes and spending their income outwith Scotland.

    Another area is that of oil and gas revenue raised in Scottish territorial waters (those waters that would be internationally recognised as Scottish, had there never been a UK) not being attributed to Scotland, as it's regarded as a UK resource.

    You'll also find that corporation tax raised by the Scottish operations of companies with HQs in England, are attributed to the HQs, thus attributed to England, such as the main UK supermarkets. I have also heard, although I cannot substantiate it, that Scottish exports leaving the UK through English ports are attributed to the port of export for revenue purposes, which applies to a lot of whisky exports.

    The list goes on!

    Anyway, since Scotland only receives a proportion of the revenues raised in Scotland, I think it's entirely up to the Scottish Government what they do with it. In truth, it tends to be for the benefit of people, whereas the main influence of your politicians are the interests of banking and corporations.

    I have attached some links for you to look at. If you disregard them, that is up to you, but we'll simply laugh at you for doing so.

    I'd finish by suggesting that it is indeed odd that since the Westminster system, governed by the most reactionary government in living memory, won't even subsidise a second bedroom, it is highly unlikely to subsidise a whole nation. If Scotland was truly a drain on the good old tax payers of England, why did Westminster move heaven and earth to lie and cheat to keep Scotland in the Union?

    http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/11/scotland-12288-union-public
    http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2066643
    http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/5-biggest-no-campaign-economics-scare-stories-debunked/
    http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/where-does-scotlands-wealth-go/
    http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-limitations-of-gers/#more-78061

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You sounds very supercilious but your figures do not correspond to what I find on for examples these websites.
      https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/464196/HMRC_disaggregated_receipts_-
      _Information___Analysis.pdf

      and
      https://www.google.co.uk/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=lQPIVN30JcSg8we2poA4#q=Population+UK+England+Scotland

      According to these, England has 84% of the population and contributes 86% of the tax revenue.
      And that does not take into account the fact that successive governments have moved English jobs up to Scotland for decade after decade to buy the Scottish Labour vote.

      Delete
    2. On the link you provided the key point is:

      Tables 1 and 2 also show the estimated shares of total UK receipts across the period.
      With North Sea revenues apportioned on a population basis, all four areas have relatively
      stable shares. For England the range is 86.2% to 86.8%; for Wales it is 3.5% to 3.8%; for
      Scotland it is 7.6% to 8.0%; for Northern Ireland it is 2.1% to 2.3%. When North Sea
      revenues are apportioned on a geographical basis, the Scottish share is increased, mainly
      at the expense of the English share and the variability is also higher for those two areas:
      for England it is 84.3% to 86.5%; for Scotland it is 8.2% to 10.1%.

      So, when North sea oil receipts are proportioned geographically, and I don't see why they wouldn't be. Then Scotland with 8.4 percent of the population has paid between 8.2 to 10.1 percent of tax. England as a whole always pays its fair percentage but if you break the UK into regions. Scotland is second outside of London.

      One key point you missed in your analysis, is that all regions of the UK are subsidised in that we run a budget deficit. We spend a lot more than we generate in taxes and that extra spending comes from borrowing. So, while Scotland is subsidised so is everywhere else in the UK.

      The flooding occurred in Scotland as well so I'm not sure why you are trying to turn it into an England V Scotland thing. You might not agree with foreign aid, but it is probably better to tackle problems in other countries at source than it is to wait till those problems come to us. Like we are seeing with the Syrian refugee crisis at the moment.

      Delete
    3. That does not amount to me being as you said "hugely ill-informed". There are weaknewsses in this claim that all the North Sea oil is Scottish, as delineations are drawnn at right-angles to the coast, not on an East-West axis. Since the May election this government has continued the policy of allocating more money per head to Scotland than to England. Sctoland & Wales also get more money per head from the EU structural fund.
      When your friends complain that Scotland pays in more than it gets back, may be attributable to the fact that in any centralised state bureaucracy, everybody (apart from beggars) pays in more than they get back. A lot of what we pay goes on the costs of running the huge top-heavy system. And one of the things that makes it expensive is you Scots having two parliaments, two sets of MPs and all the paraphenalia that goes with it.

      Delete
    4. I wasn't me who said you were hugely ill informed. I don't think Scotland pays in more than it gets back. As I said before, every region pays in less than it gets back and we borrow the rest. That's a fact. Scotland has higher public spending than average but it also produces more tax receipts than any area outside of London. Historically the Scottish deficit has been lower but it is higher now due to the oil price falling. Scotland doesn't get higher public spending because it produces more tax though. It gets higher public spending because it is half empty. It has a third of the land with only an 8th of the population. Therefore, it costs more to provide services to Scotland.

      Delete