What is the point of labour ?

[Caledonian1]

37 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Like the Andrew Wilson neoliberal 'dream' for Independence, designed to pair back public services to the bone, leaving monetary control in the hands of the Bank of England, and keeping the markets happy with a 0.5% growth rate target (which would make George Osbourne blush), or the Spectator hailing Kate Forbes as the 'McMilton Friedman of Scottish nationalism', due to the aim of cutting 30-40,000 public sector jobs, or perhaps the Scot Gov telling public sector workers to only ask for ;sensible' pay rises, (after rail workers rejected 2.2%), or maybe even handing multinational energy giants, Shell and BP 20% of ScotWind (the other big investor being TotalEnergies to build wind farms off our coasts, at a cost of £700 million paid by the Scot govt, enabling Shell, BP,, TotalEnergies to rake in £5 billion of profits (which won't be 'reinvested' in Scotland, as they have their foreign shareholders to consider. 

Is it that 'radical' SNP you mean?

Care to explain where you get your figures?

What £700m paid by Scot govt?

£5bn profits in what timescale?

Will be interesting to see your explanation of these.

[Guest Jedi]

19 minutes ago, Caledonian1 said:

Care to explain where you get your figures?

What £700m paid by Scot govt?

£5bn profits in what timescale?

Will be interesting to see your explanation of these.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-60002110

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/business/scotland-business/3852027/bp-and-shell-among-the-winners-in-truly-historic-700m-scotwind-licensing-round/

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/questions-mounting-over-approach-to-scotlands-ps700m-offshore-wind-auction-3682457

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-17/iberdrola-and-bp-win-tender-to-build-scottish-offshore-wind

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/19868171.scotwind-scotland-set-lose-billions-windfarm-profits/

[Caledonian1]

20 minutes ago, Jedi said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-60002110

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/business/scotland-business/3852027/bp-and-shell-among-the-winners-in-truly-historic-700m-scotwind-licensing-round/

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/questions-mounting-over-approach-to-scotlands-ps700m-offshore-wind-auction-3682457

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-17/iberdrola-and-bp-win-tender-to-build-scottish-offshore-wind

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/19868171.scotwind-scotland-set-lose-billions-windfarm-profits/

OK Mr cut and paste.  All those articles are indeed referring to the ScotWind licencing round but you refer to the Scottish Government paying £700m - that doesnt make any sense to me.

Didnt bother clicking on all of your links but the first few made no reference to BP, Shell and TOTAL Energies making £5bn profits (is that collectively or individually....and over what timescale)

 

44 minutes ago, Caledonian1 said:

to build wind farms off our coasts, at a cost of £700 million paid by the Scot govt

 

[Granny Danger]

1 hour ago, Jedi said:

Like the Andrew Wilson neoliberal 'dream' for Independence, designed to pair back public services to the bone, leaving monetary control in the hands of the Bank of England, and keeping the markets happy with a 0.5% growth rate target (which would make George Osbourne blush), or the Spectator hailing Kate Forbes as the 'McMilton Friedman of Scottish nationalism', due to the aim of cutting 30-40,000 public sector jobs, or perhaps the Scot Gov telling public sector workers to only ask for ;sensible' pay rises, (after rail workers rejected 2.2%), or maybe even handing multinational energy giants, Shell and BP 20% of ScotWind (the other big investor being TotalEnergies to build wind farms off our coasts, at a cost of £700 million paid by the Scot govt, enabling Shell, BP,, TotalEnergies to rake in £5 billion of profits (which won't be 'reinvested' in Scotland, as they have their foreign shareholders to consider. 

Is it that 'radical' SNP you mean?

I never used the word ‘radical’ so I’m not quite sure why you’re suggesting I did.

I’m looking at the implemented policies of the SNP which I would argue are more progressive than those Labour are proposing.

FWIW if the god botherer was ever made FM I’d probably resign my membership.

[Guest Jedi]

34 minutes ago, Caledonian1 said:

OK Mr cut and paste.  All those articles are indeed referring to the ScotWind licencing round but you refer to the Scottish Government paying £700m - that doesnt make any sense to me.

Didnt bother clicking on all of your links but the first few made no reference to BP, Shell and TOTAL Energies making £5bn profits (is that collectively or individually....and over what timescale)

 

 

You asked for sources...so not sure how that is simply 'cutting and pasting'. Of course, £5 billion energy profits (for the companies) will be over a period of time, nobody has suggested otherwise (the last source which you didn't reach references this). Every report...(these are just a selection) there are many more refers to the Scottish govt paying £700 million of public money to the energy giants, to grant them the wind farm projects off the north coast. I assume that you are comfortable with BP, Shell et al, making profits from such ventures, with that money not being re-invested into the Scottish economy. What is the point of the Scottish Investment Bank much trumpeted by the govt, if not to ensure that publically owned companies get the tender and start ups for such large projects rather than multinationals?

Do you need references for Andrew Wilson's Growth Commission Report or have you read that?

[Guest Jedi]

35 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

I never used the word ‘radical’ so I’m not quite sure why you’re suggesting I did.

I’m looking at the implemented policies of the SNP which I would argue are more progressive than those Labour are proposing.

FWIW if the god botherer was ever made FM I’d probably resign my membership.

Can you list the progressive policies....(and please exclude prescription charges, baby boxes, and scrapping car parking charges at hospitals).

[Granny Danger]

9 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Can you list the progressive policies....(and please exclude prescription charges, baby boxes, and scrapping car parking charges at hospitals).

What have the Romans done for us?

[Caledonian1]

3 minutes ago, Jedi said:

You asked for sources...so not sure how that is simply 'cutting and pasting'. Of course, £5 billion energy profits (for the companies) will be over a period of time, nobody has suggested otherwise (the last source which you didn't reach references this). Every report...(these are just a selection) there are many more refers to the Scottish govt paying £700 million of public money to the energy giants, to grant them the wind farm projects off the north coast. I assume that you are comfortable with BP, Shell et al, making profits from such ventures, with that money not being re-invested into the Scottish economy. What is the point of the Scottish Investment Bank much trumpeted by the govt, if not to ensure that publically owned companies get the tender and start ups for such large projects rather than multinationals?

Do you need references for Andrew Wilson's Growth Commission Report or have you read that?

If you dont understand the ScotWind licencing process you can just admit it rather than copy links to articles which you havent read yourself as they state the opposite to what you claim above.

All of the aforementioned offshore wind developers have submitted Supply Chain plans which will result in significant investment in Scottish infrastructure and use of Scottish supply chain companies.  You mention BP, who have set aside (with partners SPR) £25m per development for supply chain development alone. TOTAL Energies, another you mention, have commited £140m to early local supply chain investment.  Here is the link https://totalenergies.com/media/news/press-releases/scotland-totalenergies-and-scotwind-partners-commit-local-industrial  (incidentally,  I was in the room when their CEO Patrick Puyanne made that announcement and that they would join BP in locating their global offshore wind HQ's in Aberdeen)

[Guest Jedi]

16 minutes ago, Caledonian1 said:

If you dont understand the ScotWind licencing process you can just admit it rather than copy links to articles which you havent read yourself as they state the opposite to what you claim above.

All of the aforementioned offshore wind developers have submitted Supply Chain plans which will result in significant investment in Scottish infrastructure and use of Scottish supply chain companies.  You mention BP, who have set aside (with partners SPR) £25m per development for supply chain development alone. TOTAL Energies, another you mention, have commited £140m to early local supply chain investment.  Here is the link https://totalenergies.com/media/news/press-releases/scotland-totalenergies-and-scotwind-partners-commit-local-industrial  (incidentally,  I was in the room when their CEO Patrick Puyanne made that announcement and that they would join BP in locating their global offshore wind HQ's in Aberdeen)

Nice bit of both copying and pasting, and whataboutery/'I was there' though.

[Caledonian1]

2 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Nice bit of both copying and pasting, and whataboutery/'I was there' though.

Thank you

[Guest Jedi]

So, given that you helped to negotiate the deal, can you list the public stakeholders in the project?

Edited September 26, 2022 by Jedi

[Terry_Tibbs]

7 hours ago, Granny Danger said:

What have the Romans done for us?

How did the SNP pay for those pledges? With stealth cuts. They literally cut funds for tutoring sick kids in Yorkhill Children's Hospital. Don't ask me for a link to an article. I only had a close family member in there and the staff told me directly. Meanwhile our public services are falling apart. The so called progressive policies (free prescriptions for millionaires) are nothing more than cynical bribes for votes.

[Clown Job]

You know we can vote out the SNP pretty easily in Scotland and with the way the Scottish Parliament is designed any single party getting a majority is very difficult

Whereas in Westminster all you need to do is win England to control the UK, you don’t need the Scots, Welsh or NI to back you for power 

[Salt n Vinegar]

Interesting stuff coming out from Sarwar.

He bangs on about the politics of us versus them and the politics of division when discussing the SNP, apparently ignoring the pretty obvious point that he is indulging in exactly the same approach to the decades old politics of right v left, boss v worker and public v private sector so beloved of Labour and the Tories. 

Unless of course he is in some way suggesting that in his view Labour aren't fundamentally opposed to the Tories - no us versus them and no politics of division for him - and you can't slip a piece of paper between the Labour and Tory parties and their attitudes to Scotland. No, surely not. 

[Benjamin_Nevis]

3 hours ago, Terry_Tibbs said:

How did the SNP pay for those pledges? With stealth cuts. They literally cut funds for tutoring sick kids in Yorkhill Children's Hospital. Don't ask me for a link to an article. I only had a close family member in there and the staff told me directly. 

Lies then. Cool.

Off you pop. 

[scottsdad]

16 minutes ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

Interesting stuff coming out from Sarwar.

[williemillersmoustache]

The important point to remember is that on Radio 4 yesterday, Anas Sarwar launched a righteous attack on the "lying, cheating, stealing, corrupt and incompetent"  Conservatives, who his party is in coalition with, then reaffirmed the Labour pledge to never ever work with the SNP under any circumstances. Of course Chris Mason had neither the gumption, knowledge or more correctly the editorial direction to question this glaring contradiction.

Anas then went on to demand that in the event of Labour not winning an outright majority the SNP would have no choice but to support them, with no concessions in particular nothing on indyref.

So, louder and in simple terms for remnants of the Labour Party at the back:  "It is not the job of the Scottish electorate or those they elect to represent them, to deliver England a Labour government it did not vote for and that directly opposes and obstructs the needs, wants and aspirations of the Scottish electorate which they have endorsed and demanded multiple times in successive elections."

Should post the next GE the electoral arithmetic means that the SNP hold the keys to no.10 and Keith maintains his current position of "f**k you, back me or f**k off" I'd hope and expect the SNP Westminster group to spend their time drinking on the terrace, playing pool and patiently waiting for them to change their mind and respect democracy or scuttle back to the opposition benches. Probably forever. 

[Granny Danger]

3 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:

The important point to remember is that on Radio 4 yesterday, Anas Sarwar launched a righteous attack on the "lying, cheating, stealing, corrupt and incompetent"  Conservatives, who his party is in coalition with, then reaffirmed the Labour pledge to never ever work with the SNP under any circumstances. Of course Chris Mason had neither the gumption, knowledge or more correctly the editorial direction to question this glaring contradiction.

Anas then went on to demand that in the event of Labour not winning an outright majority the SNP would have no choice but to support them, with no concessions in particular nothing on indyref.

So, louder and in simple terms for remnants of the Labour Party at the back:  "It is not the job of the Scottish electorate or those they elect to represent them, to deliver England a Labour government it did not vote for and that directly opposes and obstructs the needs, wants and aspirations of the Scottish electorate which they have endorsed and demanded multiple times in successive elections."

Should post the next GE the electoral arithmetic means that the SNP hold the keys to no.10 and Keith maintains his current position of "f**k you, back me or f**k off" I'd hope and expect the SNP Westminster group to spend their time drinking on the terrace, playing pool and patiently waiting for them to change their mind and respect democracy or scuttle back to the opposition benches. Probably forever. 

If the SNP hold the balance of power they have to take the stance you suggest otherwise they will be finished; and rightly so.

[Pocketman]

40 minutes ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

Interesting stuff coming out from Sarwar.

He bangs on about the politics of us versus them and the politics of division when discussing the SNP, apparently ignoring the pretty obvious point that he is indulging in exactly the same approach to the decades old politics of right v left, boss v worker and public v private sector so beloved of Labour and the Tories. 

Unless of course he is in some way suggesting that in his view Labour aren't fundamentally opposed to the Tories - no us versus them and no politics of division for him - and you can't slip a piece of paper between the Labour and Tory parties and their attitudes to Scotland. No, surely not. 

us v them and division - pitting family member against family member - only applies when discussing changes to the constitution. 

Much in the same way that Scottish self determination is toxic nationalism whereas putting the UK and the union in front of everything else is healthy patriotism. 

[williemillersmoustache]

Just now, Granny Danger said:

If the SNP hold the balance of power they have to take the stance you suggest otherwise they will be finished; and rightly so.

Bollocks. It wouldn't be the SNP preventing a Labour government it would be Labour, preventing a Labour government.