Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Major blames Brown for making 'train wreck' of the UK economy

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 15 December 2008
FORMER prime minister Sir John Major yesterday launched a scathing attack on Gordon Brown, blaming him for the economic "train wreck" facing Britain.
Sir John predicted an "avalanche" of job losses next year as the recession hits families across the country and poured scorn on Mr Brown's package of tax give-aways.

He warned the recession would be deeper and longer in the UK because of the scale
of government borrowing.

He said Mr Brown had "squandered" the economic growth he inherited as chancellor from the Tory government in 1997: "They have spent and spent and spent."

Sir John, who was faced with a rising tide of unemployment during the recession of the early 1990s, said: "I fear we are going to have an avalanche of job losses in the first three or four months of next year."

He said it was ironic that Mr Brown, the man who had been in charge of the nation's finances since 1997, was leading the response to the turmoil.

Sir John said: "If a burglar has ransacked your house, you don't normally invite him back to fix the security locks. The concept that Gordon Brown, who has presided over this train wreck, is the person to put right what he got wrong strikes me as being ironic to say the least."

He supported the government's banking bail-out plan, but attacked measures Mr Brown hoped would provide a boost to the ailing economy.

Sir John said: "The reduction in VAT? You might as well have burned the money and thrown it away, frankly. I don't think it will do anything credible at all."

Sir John said the government paid £262 million interest every day on the debt and commented: "It's a frightening scenario."

The economic situation was the worst since the Second World War, Sir John said, but accused ministers of over-hyping the crisis with comparisons to the Great Depression.

He said other countries were better placed to afford a fiscal stimulus package because they had stronger reserves.

"If we continue borrowing like this, the world will be coming out of recession and we will have a huge amount of borrowing that will force up interest rates. In three years' time, as the world comes out of recession, in the United Kingdom we will have higher interest rates, we will have higher National Insurance contributions because the government have already implemented that, and we will have higher taxes."

The Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Yvette Cooper, said she "completely disagreed" with Sir John's analysis. She said: "John Major's government actually doubled the level of national debt and also pushed borrowing up to about the same proportion of national income that we are seeing here.

"But that was as a result of a home-grown inflationary problem where interest rates hit 15 per cent, not as a result of the biggest financial crisis to hit the world for very many generations."

The government's actions would "help us come out of this stronger and faster", she added.





Page 1 of 1

 
1

Professor-Quincy-Adams-Wagstaff ,

14/12/2008 23:21:10
NEVSKY WHERE ARE YOU??

YOU HAVE GONE VERY QUIET.
========================================================
From the BBC;

The Irish government is to provide a fund of £9bn (10bn euros) to recapitalise all its listed banks.

The money will be available to AIB, Anglo-Irish, Irish Nationwide, Irish Life & Permanent and Bank of Ireland, which owns the Bristol & West bank.

However before any money is paid out, the banks must await the outcome of the most recent rights issue.

If private investors choose not to step in, then the state will have to provide the money instead using the fund.

Finance Minister Brian Lenihan told RTE News: "Some financial institutions are so embedded in our economy, in terms of their borrowing and in terms of their deposits, that they are of systemic importance to our economy.

"It's very important that our banking system is seen to sustain our economy and support our economy."

Bank of Ireland and AIB shares have fallen 92% and 88% respectively this year.

=======================================================

Oh dear Oh Dear, Nevsky has been bleating on for months about how the Irish banks are in sterling health and did not need '1 penny' of assistance from the Irish Government.

Well guess what happened...

So Nevsky,

Iceland crashed and burned.
Ireland has now crashed and burned.
If anything happens to Norway........................

2

Professor-Quincy-Adams-Wagstaff ,

14/12/2008 23:29:24
Oh and Nevsky..............

BBC business correspondent Joe Lynam said that, as a proportion of its economy and banking sector compared to the UK, the Irish bailout represents an even bigger capital injection than Britain's.

No luck Nevsky, your zero credibility just went negative.
3

UK007,

15/12/2008 00:09:07
#1/#2 A well written comprehensive analysis of the current situation.
4

subrosa,

15/12/2008 00:15:44
# 1

"A weak pound shows a weak economy and a weak government" - Gordon Brown
5

Castaway™ ,

15/12/2008 00:23:23
And 41 years ago..........
In a radio and television broadcast this evening, the Prime Minister said devaluation would enable Britain to " break out from the straitjacket" of boom and bust economics.
The only alternative, he said, was to borrow heavily from governments abroad - but the only loans on offer were short-term ones.
He said: "Our decision to devalue attacks our problem at the root and that is why the international monetary community have rallied round.
"From now the pound abroad is worth 14% or so less in terms of other currencies. It does not mean, of course, that the pound here in Britain, in your pocket or purse or in your bank, has been devalued.
"What it does mean is that we shall now be able to sell more goods abroad on a competitive basis."

Harold Wilson - 29 Nov 1967
6

Darien,

Panama 15/12/2008 00:39:07
"£262 million interest every day on the debt" of UK

Guess where the next 30 years of Scottish oil revenue in going. Some union dividend.
7

Professor-Quincy-Adams-Wagstaff ,

15/12/2008 00:50:04
#7 Darien, sounds like you have accepted that independence is off the Agenda.

Good boy.
8

Edward,

15/12/2008 01:00:04
Clown Yvette Cooper said 'The government's actions would "help us come out of this stronger and faster", she added.' erm nope it will not
Goods in shops will become more expensive as we do not manufacture goods in the uk they are imported. There is absolutly no confidence in Brown's handling of the UK, which is why the pound is now a basket case
9

Ju@n Kerr - the ex labour sheep,

15/12/2008 01:39:00
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=aMiqkxTOgOY - Rufus. You and grahamski can sit up late and split the heating in your bedsits and use this to keep warm. The Gordon Brown Superman rap.....
10

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 15/12/2008 01:55:39
We have GOT TO GET AWAY FROM england BEFORE THEY BANKRUPT SCOTLAND AS WELL. They are an EMBARASSMENT TO BE WITH. INDEPENDENCE AT ALL COSTS!!!!!!!
11

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 15/12/2008 02:13:16
#1 Do you care to comment on the 917 Billion Pounds of unfunded pension obligations for the UK public sector?

I noticed you did not post before everyone else on that thread?

Maybe you missed it.

But thats a much larger number than the 9 Billion for the Irish Banks.
12

Colin Allcars,

Fettes Avenue 15/12/2008 07:01:45
#1 After 11 years of mismanagement from a government that promised us that they would make things better, the UK is well and truly screwed. No-one in their right mind would be comfortable with the position that the UK finds itself in now (which is the worst economic state of any western economy).

The UK is up to its eyes in debt that it cannot afford and can have no hope of paying off anytime soon. We have an economy that does not produce anything that can be used to pay the debt off other than, oh yeah, financial services.

And yet here you are playing "party politics" on a discussion board. Talk about fiddling while Rome burns! A class act!
13

John Cameron,

St Andrews 15/12/2008 07:13:34
This is very unkind of Sir John. He is clearly an unbeliever. The Great Leader HAD conquered boom and bust but some effects dating from the terrible regimes of Benjamin Disraeli and Stanley Baldwin suddenly appeared. So it is clearly nothing to do with ZANU Labour that we are in this complete mess. Any doubters and back sliders need only ask the Dear Leader's great colleague and mentor, Robert Mugabe, to receive confirmation of the above.
14

Number 6,

Germany 15/12/2008 07:51:12
Brown will go down in history as easily the worst performing Prime Minister ever. Liebour supporters must be so proud.
15

steve 1511,

aberdeen 15/12/2008 08:05:36
WERE DOOMED WITH BROON,DOOOOOMED
16

,

15/12/2008 09:34:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
17

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 15/12/2008 09:50:11
#12
Sadly, I think we are too late. Our grandchildren will be paying for Maggie Brown's financial expertise.

In order to stave off deflation, they are pumping "virtual" money into the economy. They will overshoot (they always do) and the result will be rampant inflation by the end of 2009 into 2010.
18

brianmca3,

auld reekie 15/12/2008 09:51:35
#1 ah i see sebastian is on again,been having a snog with brown at the weekend have we,or a double date with darling as well
you know all you ever do is run scotland down,you really are the pits
using groucho marx names for handles
you know alice cooper was a good friend of groucho,s
maybe next time alice is at the playhouse,we can feed you to his snake
then we can all get peace from you
19

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 15/12/2008 09:58:41
#1
Rather pathetic that you highlight the problems of Ireland and Iceland, but ignore the problems of this union with England.

A lower pound will help exports?? So what does the UK still make that it can export:
Ships? - no!
Car? - no!
Computers? - no!
Phones? - no!
TV's? - no!
White Goods? - no!

All the leading brands of these are imported. And guess what happens to the cost of imports when the pound is low.
20

Alan B,

15/12/2008 10:34:10
Brown has wrecked the uk economy. We better get used to it.
21

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

15/12/2008 10:46:53
Hindsight is such a wonderful thing.

I don't recall Major or many other Tory politicians protesting too much when Brown was increasing public sepnding. No political party, not the Tories, the Lib Dems or the SNP, were proposing economic policies that were fundamentally different from Labour's. For example, the Tories advocated the same spending plans as Labour at the last two elections.

The few voices who did warn about the credit bubble and house price inflation were not in the political parties - because it is not a vote winner to tell the electorate that they were going to slow/cut public spending or slow down house price rises.

I find it hard to convince believe that the Tories would have done anything fundamentally different. At the end of the day it is all ifs and buts. What we say for certain is that they were not particularly vocal about critising Brown.
22

watcher,

Edinburgh 15/12/2008 11:02:05
Says the man that gave us the 15% interest rate. The grey Ghost of the British Coast. Major is one of the Greedy incompetant idiots that have got us in this mess.
23

Alan B,

15/12/2008 11:05:33
#The Federalist

Do you really think the tories would have spend as much as labour over the period?

What we had was Brown accepting the tought/tight tory spending limits in his first few yrs and then letting it rip. The tories would have been the opposite. Would have accepted labour spending plans for the first few yrs and then run a much tighter fiscal policy, most likely with significantly lower taxation.

There is no way right wingers like Duncan-Smith or Howard or Hague would have spent so much tax over a period of time. I consider it highly unlikely they would have run up so much debt deliberately.

With regard to consumer debt and house price inflation you maybe correct. Altough again we do not know what or how the tories would really have run monetary policy and it would depend at what point they took over from labour.

I think you are confusing lack of public slating of labour economic policy during the boom times with a view that the tories would have run a similar economic policy. For one thing the intricacies of economic policy are not really something the public know or understand and hence not really an politicial election issue. Blair showed to win just dumb down.

There are a few things to remember with monetary policy.

1) the european central bank targets the money supply ie credit. This is similar to thatchers early monetarism under howe. Would the tories have gone for money supply targetting with Duncan-smith etc and hence control the debt levels.

2)the tories used a rpi inflation measure that included housing costs. Would the tories have accepted labours cpi measure and used it for setting interest rates via the mpc.

There is also the area of regulation within the financial services. Many use this to say it was due to deregulation when the truth is it was more due to poor regulation. Would the tories have set up the fsa removing financial regualation from the BOE. Would the BOE have been so incompetent.

The problem is it
24

Alan B,

15/12/2008 11:08:22
#watcher

Care to explain.

I would say much of the tory time they had the right idea about many things but made some key errors and were generally poor with their implementation.

Whereas Brown has deliberately run the economic for short term political gain into the ground after inheriting a decent economy.

The uk fiscal position was far better when brown inherited the economy in 97 than it is now.

25

Alan B,

15/12/2008 11:09:56
#Fed (got cut off)

The problem is it is like a football manager. We do not know if someone else would really be better. But what we do know is the current mob were poor.

26

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

15/12/2008 11:35:25
Alan B - you have made the point before that a large number of the electorate are both politically and economically illiterate. That view seems to be confirmed by The Times own Populus poll which shows the Brown-Darling team having the biggest lead for 14 months over Cameron-Osborne on economic competence.

The Tories are relying on hostility growing as the recession deepens but it does not appear to be hitting home. Many voters believe that the recession is predominantly a US-created phenomenon - not surprising considering how the media have reported it.

Moreover, because the Tories have only shifted late in the day to an anti-Keynesian position they will find it hard to build up support for that message. It is easier for Labour to say they are doing something whilst the Tories can be portrayed as having a "do nothing" policy. It is also difficult for the Tories as they are very much swimming against the tide regards their approach to the recession. The majority of other countries are adopting some kind of fiscal stimulus - not necessarily the same as Brown's - but the public are not as discerning to notice the difference. The Tories can be painted as uncaring and not doing anything about the recession. It perhaps explains why Cameron has just announced in the last hour that they would have a £50 billion guarantee scheme for small businesses. They need to counter the "uncaring" argument fast or they will find that although Labour has responsibility for some of this mess that many in the electorate will not blame them.
27

Cauchy Riemann,

Wales 15/12/2008 11:41:24
#27 The Federalist

Actually everything you have written in this post is simply wrong.

A few links
BORROWING:
From 2003:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2844470/Brown%27s-debt-GDP-ratio-%27far-higher-than-stated%27.html

Conservatives and others pointing out that Labour's debt to GDP is a lot higher than it is being claimed. Labour was fiddling the figures to make its borrowing look fine.

http://www.economicsuk.com/blog/000008.html is another link pointing out high borrowing.

Again in 2004 the Tories were pointing out Brown was misleading the country on borrowing.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article396664.ece

"BRITAIN’S national debt has risen to an alarming 85 per cent of national income under Gordon Brown, rather than falling as he has claimed, the Opposition calculates ahead of this week’s Pre-Budget Report. The Treasury has ignored an estimated £580 billion of liabilities to pay occupational pensions to public sector workers that are not backed by pension funds."

Apart from government borrowing, personal debt was an item that kept on cropping up with criticism from both the lib dems, tories.

PERSONAL DEBT:
Example from 2003:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1448274/Brown-destroying-savings-culture-claims-Letwin.html

Letwin said: "Government complacency about the rise in personal debt could produce a long-term crisis"

HOUSE PRICES: From 2003
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/houseprice-bubble-may-devastate-economy--imf-599409.html

>>Britain is in the throes of a "house-price bubble" that could burst at any time with devastating consequences for the economy, the global financial regulator warned yesterday<<

These same criticisms were voiced in the House with Brown simply stating everything was OK.

"Brown dismisses house price crash" - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3656701.stm

Conclusion:
There was repeated criticism and warning from tories, lib dems, and
28

Alan B,

15/12/2008 11:47:37
#32 The Federalist

Do not disagree. Real economic management and good politics are separate issues. Labour may win the political battle. Who knows.

The only think i would say is the media are slowing turning against Brown. Picked up the independent (more of a labour paper than tory) on the train on Friday and they slated Browns economic management.

But the election will probably come down to the sun readers etc. So much will depend on the route Murdoch takes with his editorial lines in his papers.

29

Alan B,

15/12/2008 11:55:06
#Cauchy Riemann

I think where the fed was correct in his critism of the tories is they did not coherently set out a different economic policy and argue that position over time.

Some of that was due to them not being confident after 97 and the party being abit of a shambles. Part was due to the it being hard to argue against an economic policy which is doing well at that point in time even if in the long run it will run into severe problems. And lastly the blair way of winning elections by dumbing down. Cameron has gone strongly for that approach.

I mean there is no evidence that the tories would have controlled house price inflation and hence consumer debts. You need actual coherent policies if you want to be taken seriously.

Tory monetary policy in power was generally a shambles.

The tories started pfi and used this off balance sheet method of debt. And while they may have used it considerably less and more responsibily it is hard to argue that labour were to blame for all this off balance sheet debt.

Abit like invalidity. The tories used it to hide a bit of unemployment. Labour take the whole thing to town and end up increasing invalidity to 2.7million. As such the tories own lack of ethics have allowed labour to do similar things but at more extreme levels.
30

Darien,

Panama 15/12/2008 12:03:55
#8 Prof "..sounds like you have accepted that independence is off the Agenda."

You are so so off track.
31

Professor-Quincy-Adams-Wagstaff ,

15/12/2008 12:27:24
24 For Scotlands Future,Vote for the SNP
You asked.............

"A lower pound will help exports?? So what does the UK still make that it can export:"

Well here is a list of the top 20 exported goods for the month of September. Sorry it does not format too well but you can always go to the Department for National Statistics website.

As you can see you were wrong.

======================================================


TOP 20 Products Monthly by Chapter September 2008
UK Exports - General Trade (£ million) % change % share
Rank Chapter Description September 2008 YTD 2008 YTD 2007 08/07 2008 YTD*
1 84 Nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery and mechanical appliances; parts thereof 3154 27950 25966 8 15

2 27 Mineral fuels, mineral oils and products of their distillation; bituminous substances; mineral waxes 3151 25883 16265 59 14

3 87 Vehicles other than railway or tramway rolling-stock, and parts and accessories thereof 2002 18443 16066 15 10

4 85 Electrical machinery and equipment and parts thereof; sound recorders and reproducers, television image and sound recorders and reproducers, and parts and accessories of such articles 1642 13872 13207 5 7

5 30 Pharmaceutical products 1583 12086 10503 15 6

6 71 Natural or cultured pearls, precious or semi-precious stones, precious metals, metals clad with precious metal, and articles thereof; imitation jewellery; coin 1039 8823 6847 29 5

7 29 Organic chemicals 608 6639 6175 8 4

8 90 Optical, photographic, cinematographic, measuring, checking, precision, medical or surgical instruments and apparatus; parts and accessories thereof 746 6489 5937 9 3

9 72 Iron and steel 650 5845 4594 27 3

10 88 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 658 5519 4641 19 3

11 39 Plastics and plastic products 551 5096 4892 4 3

12 22 Beverages, spirits and vinegar 438 3267 2913 12 2

13 3
32

Professor-Quincy-Adams-Wagstaff ,

15/12/2008 12:29:11
13 61 Articles of apparel and clothing accessories, knitted or crocheted 620 4,299 4,077


14 48 Paper and paperboard; articles of paper pulp, paper or paperboard 503 4,214 4,092

15 72 Iron and steel 491 4,070 3,729

16 73 Articles of iron or steel 433 4,002 3,711

17 22 Beverages, spirits and vinegar 387 3,215 2,916

18 95 Toys, games and sports requisites; parts and accessories thereof 552 2,697 2,371

19 44 Wood and articles of wood; wood charcoal 249 2,533 2,785

20 02 Meat and edible meat offal 270 2,455 2,234
33

Cauchy Riemann,

Wales 15/12/2008 12:37:53
"I mean there is no evidence that the tories would have controlled house price inflation and hence consumer debts..."

Well there is no evidence either way. We don't know what they would have done because they weren't in power. Even if they had spelt out things, well promises in opposition mean zilch. You mentioned pfi. Blair heavily criticised pfi in opposition and then when in power dived into pfi more than the tories.

Fed's point was one of 'this is hindsight'. But since opposition parties and others were pointing out that borrowing, personal debt, and house prices were mushrooming to critical levels in 2003+ it isn't fair to say the current problems were 'hindsight'.

Would the tories have controlled house prices? Possibly not - no idea. I think they would have curtailed borrowing and dampened personal debt. Remember the tories 'debt t*osser' campaign that provoked criticism?

At the end of the day there was sufficient criticism of Browns fiscal policies - it wasn't hindsight. And remember it was Brown who claimed Britain would not see a house price crash in 2004.
34

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 15/12/2008 12:53:33
#1 & #2 Rufus
Like most unionists, you appear somewhat confused when it comes to figures.

Recently your MP’s in Westminster were seen hooting with glee when London’s muppet in Scotland made a big play of pointing to the London Government’s investment in RBS and HBOS actually exceeding the annual block grant of pocket money they allocate back to Holyrood, and implying that this fact showed that Scotland was too small, too poor and too stupid to look after our own financial affairs.

Now, when an even smaller, poorer country, lacking in many of the natural resources we enjoy, comes along and is able to invest “an even bigger capital injection than Britain's”, you appear to think that this indicates an argument in favour of continued dependence upon the increasingly discredited current arrangement??

Your financial logic, or rather, the lack of it, is a source of daily amusement.

I implore you to keep up the good work, and to post even more frequently.
35

Beachcomber,

Edinburgh 15/12/2008 12:54:46


A petition has been raised on the No.10 e-petitions page.. regarding the meglomaniacs financial incompetence.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/list/open?cat=726
36

Faux Cul,

15/12/2008 12:58:14
http://tinyurl.com/699vss

From The Times by Irwin Stelzer
37

Faux Cul,

15/12/2008 13:02:31
Irwin Stelzer is widely reported to be Rupert Irwin Stelzer Murdoch's right hand man and has the ear of Browen, Blair and Darling to an inordinate degree.

Has he turned on Brown on his own or has Rupert given up the ghost on Brown?

Standby for the Sun to publish ant Brown economic analyses?
38

Faux Cul,

15/12/2008 13:05:38
#42
Beachcomber,
Edinburgh 15/12/2008 12:54:46

Which number?
39

PaulW,

Borders 15/12/2008 13:26:35
#37

Interesting that #2 on your list of exports is effectively Oil and prodicts derived from oil....and manufacturing of beverages appears twice - I'll hazard a guess that one of those two (possibly both) is distillation of spirits. In 2007, the Uk (mainly Scotland) exported £4 billion of beverages, most of which was spirits such as Whisky.

In September alone, the UK's deficit on trade of goods was £7.8 billion - you must be so proud.

Yet you and your fellow British nationalists believe Scotland is too wee and too poor to be Independent. Oh, the irony.

Actually in 2007, what was the UK's number one export? Why Oil of course. £23 billion of it. And before the usual Unionist cassandras strike, that was BEFORE the oil price spike last year.
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_economy/Mm24Oct08.pdf

At a UK level, the imports of oil actually exceed exports by around £3 billion, but for Scotland this is totally untrue of course. We are responsible for around 85% of oil exports, but only equate to around 9% of UK oil demand. Just imagine how weak the pound would be if the UK (or rest of UK) balance of trade was £23 billion worse....oh dear.....

The Government at UK level doesn't seem to grasp that devaluation, while aiding some exports, also imports inflation, as manufactured goods sold in Euros or dollars become more expensive in pounds sterling(Germany is our main source of imports). Higher interest rates and inflationary pressures are round the corner. We have had the bust, but if there is any recovery, it could be choked off by the MPC having to address imported inflation. And we will have new taxes to pay too. Brown will have to call an election in 2009 before the stuff hits the fan in a big way.





40

Westfield Bairns,

falkirk 15/12/2008 14:06:09
Whats the World coming to John Major who wasn't exactly a great Prime Minister gives the loathed and anti-Scottish Gordon Brown a slap down.
Gordon Brown will go down as the worst Prime Minister the UK has ever had. Independence can't come quick enough
41

JCA REID,

Annan 15/12/2008 14:11:52
The falling pound will help exports. What exports? Only a few years ago a friend of the family who is a long-distance lorry driver, who had to take 'exports' to the continent. His loads - Wheelie-Bins. That is what Britain exports to the world!!.
42

Faux Cul,

15/12/2008 14:14:36
Section 4 of The Mental Health Act

The one that applies to Gordon MadBroon
43

Professor-Quincy-Adams-Wagstaff ,

15/12/2008 14:17:38
48 JCA REID,Annan 15/12/2008 14:11:52
The falling pound will help exports. What exports?
======================================================
Well according to the British Chambers of commerce, the UK is the world’s sixth largest exporter of goods and services; business which is worth around £200 billion every year, equating to 17% of the country’s total GDP. In terms of investment, the UK is second only to the USA as the world’s largest investor in overseas markets.
44

Alan B,

15/12/2008 14:26:15
If Brown had any honour he would have resigned for his incompetence.

Politics no longer has any honour or ministerial responsibility left.
45

Faux Cul,

15/12/2008 14:39:29
Has The Herald stopped publishing their web hits now?

If so, wonder why?
46

Beachcomber,

Edinburgh 15/12/2008 15:11:13
Faux Cul Its Item 8.

47

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 15/12/2008 15:15:24
It certainly takes a wrecker to know one!
48

Faux Cul,

15/12/2008 16:20:13
Baechcomer

Sorry but can't find it.

Can you be more specific; I will keep on trying.

Thanks
49

Alan Reid,

Zurich 15/12/2008 16:32:37
Having spent the last month and a half working all over Denmark, a country that has much smaller oil and gas reserves than Scotland. And speaking to many Danes over this time, it is easy to conclude that Scotland would easily prosper as an independent country.
And by the way, the Danes are very happy with the way their country is governed, even with a 50% minimum tax rate!! They don’t pay, for ANY medical bills, including dentist, and eye treatment, their public transport is first rate etc. In short, their country is LIGHT YEARS ahead for Scotland and the UK in public services, and we in Scotland supposed to be content to believe that London is doing the best for us!!!
The Unionists who write on this forum are desperate not to let Scotland for they know when it happens England would be a third world country OVERNIGHT. You can insult the SNP and supporters as much as you want Rufus, Scotland is on the up. The SNP will make some mistakes, but no one can argue that Scotland can, and will do very well on its own.
So sorry Rufus and co, I’m open to honest and intelligent debate, but over these last few months of reading your posts, not of you have come out with ONE reason to persuade me that I’m wrong in thinking that Scotland would be worse off independent.
Rufus and other Unionists, you’re not going to win any argument by calling Alex Salmond fat, it is stupid and juvenile argument, in which you’re bound to fail in, get real.
50

Darien,

Panama 15/12/2008 17:20:32
#57 Alan: Agree with you that Scotland would be far more successful as an independent state. However the barrier is still the egits in Glenrothes and other places across Scotland who persist in voting for New Lab spivs or for any other British Nationalist union-jack tub thumping party willing to trade off Scottish interests and resources.
51

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 15/12/2008 18:07:15
#50 Rufus
Excellent post, however as usual it is absolute drivel.

Numbers just aint your thing, are they?

The UK deficit on trade in goods in October 2008 was £7.8 billion. Exports fell by £0.7 billion and imports fell by £0.3 billion. (source:office of national statistics).

As a net importer of goods to the extent of nearly £100 billion per annum, a 25% increase in the cost of these goods is going to have a major negative impact upon every sector of the economy.

Also, it is important to remember under who's watch this massive trade deficit has arisen.
52

McGinty,

Glasgow & Aberdeen 15/12/2008 18:57:08
A bit of an unfortunate analogy from Mr Major considering his own treatment of the railways.
53

Alan Reid,

Zurich 15/12/2008 19:28:26
Rufus, also mate I hope you’re not forgetting the shafting that Scotland got over the Roysth V Devonport debacle?
You must remember that one, when a MOD contract to refit the nuclear subs went to davenport rather than Roysth. Roysth which had more experience, all the proper faculties, and was 22 million cheaper!!!! After all that, it still went the England! Why? To protect English jobs, and of course to keep a marginal seat save in Tory hands, under John Majors government.
Thank you Mr Major, people like you make the job of the SNP easy.
It was a bit unfortunate that 3000 Scots lost their jobs, and because Devonport did not have the facilities, their overspent 1 BILLION pounds building the same facilities, that Roysth already had.

Great another Union dividend!!!!

So please Rufus, can you tell me why I should believe you.
54

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 15/12/2008 20:18:19
#62
I suspect that “Rufus” will have no memory of the events which you describe.
“Rufus” is part of a consortium of George Foulkes teenage acolytes, who think that their public school education somehow equips them to comment upon matters of which they have no personal knowledge.
They know nothing of Scotland or our culture, and are merely visitors to our land.
I do not particularly mind their transient presence, indeed their contributions are generally welcome.
It is always instructive to listen to obtuse views.
55

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 16/12/2008 00:20:08
You would stuggle to find any stupid labour government in history who has left the economy in a better state than they inherited it from the Tories in.

It is about time that stupid labour was outlawed. They are an incompetent bunch of bumbling fools who manage to pursuade idiots to vote for them.
56

Mark Taylor,

Crawley, Suðseax ,England 18/12/2008 11:07:15
Please take Broon back we don't want him or Darling either.
You can also take the outrageous sppeaker Martin who allows unlawful searches without warrant to take place in MP's homes.
Please go independent at the first chance so that England can do the same. We need an English parliament to sort this mess out now, not a man who insists on absurd anachronistic "Britishness" yet has signed the Scottish Claim of Right which pledges him to always place Scotland's needs first.
The man's a fraud and an incompetent and is generally hated in England.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.