Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 17th May 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Scotland will fail to hit top-priority economic targets, reckon experts



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: 07 May 2008
By David Maddox
Political Correspondent
THE economy was one of Alex Salmond's top priorities when he came into office, but a report has claimed that his government will fail to hit his two most important growth targets.
The study by the Centre for Public Policy for Regions (CPPR), a research centre run jointly by the universities of Glasgow and Strathclyde, has claimed the SNP government is well away from raising Scotland's economic growth rate to UK levels by 2011.


It says to meet this target, Scotland needs an extra 20 per cent growth in five years.

Added to that, it states Scotland is far from reaching the productivity levels of small independent EU countries by 2017.

But the CPPR report does say that all the other economic growth targets should be met.

The report concludes: "The picture overall is fairly positive for the government. However, this view is rather clouded by the fact that it is the government's prime targets, of higher growth and higher productivity, that are the two notable levels.

"If the improvement in population growth comes about, then this will help GDP growth but, even then, targets 1 and 2 (GDP growth and productivity] remain very ambitious."

Labour's shadow finance secretary Iain Gray said: "This report should make very worrying reading not just for John Swinney but for all of us. Without increasing growth and productivity, Scotland will be left behind. Alex Salmond talks big on economic growth but the SNP are not investing in the skills, infrastructure or research which would actually drive that growth."

However, the Scottish Government said that the report should be taken positively.

"The most recent GDP figures indicated that the Scottish economy grew faster than the UK in the third and fourth quarters of 2007. In the face of global economic uncertainty, confidence in the Scottish economy compares favourably to the UK as a whole at the present time," a spokesman said.

CBI Scotland has also been supportive of the SNP economic policy and growth targets.



The full article contains 341 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Angus Ogg,

06/05/2008 23:31:15

This is a bit tricky for the SNP Government. Bill Clinton was exceptionally right when he emphasised, and equated how important the economy is to the electoral fortunes of a candidate or party.

Alex Slamond will be forgiven a lot by a huge number of voters, and have an extended political honeymoon if he manages to keep the economy bouyant. At least more bouyant than the economy south of the Border.

Anything less and the fortunes of the SNP may very well slide. This would be a great shame as the SNP are off to a barnstorming start to their first time in government.
2

Wardog,

Buckie 07/05/2008 00:05:51


More doom and gloom form labour's resident nae sayer

The most recent GDP figures indicated that the Scottish economy grew faster than the UK in the third and fourth quarters of 2007.

In the face of global economic uncertainty, confidence in the Scottish economy compares favourably to the UK as a whole at the present time.

Given the times report that lots of companies are threatening to leave the UK because of Broon's proposed tax changes, the Scotsman could possible raise it's game a wee bit

3

Senga Jean,

07/05/2008 00:18:51
The SNP Government are doing much with little. Now if they had the real levers of economic power they would be hard to beat. Independence cannot come quick enough and if Wendy hurries it up so much the better. If she is just having an intelligence challenge or a minor break-down then we will just have to wait another year for the SNP Government to comply with their manifesto timetable.
4

ratzo,

07/05/2008 00:20:45
The CPPR are hardly impartial - they're composed of mr wendy alexander and a troll who is not unknown to these pages.
5

truthsleuth,

07/05/2008 00:39:25
ASS and friends are in the S##T.

Listen to the squeals from the SNP

As usual its somebody elses fault.
The messenger is a labour stooge


Will they never be honest with themselves

PS

I have no political allegiance I speak as I see.
6

The Answer,

Glasgow 07/05/2008 01:10:26
Male employment in scotland is lower than male employment in Yorkshire and The Humber!
7

Matt there,

somewhere 07/05/2008 01:27:29
With the dead weight of Gordon the Sheet anchor it is amazing ANY part of the British isles is doing as well s Scotland is.
8

kirk 1,

07/05/2008 01:34:11
#5 You may have no political allegiance, however take a look at the make up of the CPPR.
You just can't help being a wee bit suspicious.

9

,

07/05/2008 01:34:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
10

Edward,

07/05/2008 01:45:52
What facinates me is that the SNP Government were only elected a year ago. Labour and the Libdems were in power eight years and made a mess of the economy, never once did they manage or attempt to get to proper levels. Now we have this study, which is supposed to be critical of the current government. Now I knwo that Alex Salmond and John Swinney are supposed to be great at sorting things but I think its stretching the imagination to think that even they can turn around eight mis-spent years!
Labour's Iain Gray is careful not to be too critical as basically its his party that never done anything when in power and he still insist on touting the so called skills academies, sorry Iain, they dont work! get over it stop trotting out what your told from London
11

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 07/05/2008 03:56:31
Who cares now SCOTLAND will be INDEPENDENT by then so the targets set by the SNP will be far far too LOW!!!!
12

Watson,

Irvine 07/05/2008 06:25:45
Just more Nat bashing. A non story from an ass wipe paper
13

Samoyed,

Costa del Menie 07/05/2008 06:59:27
I agree with Kirk1 @ #8, the CPPR is a wee suspicious, but not only in its composition, in its attitude too.

Please refresh my memory: Which kind of people/organizations keeps naming the Scottish Government the Scottish Executive?

Well, the CPPR does, as can easely be found in their web site. Would someone please pass the salt?
14

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 07/05/2008 07:30:01
Hmmm. We have £50 million per day running through Grangemouth and we won't reach targets?

That is, um, a lot of billions of pounds generated every year right here in Scotland. We must be doing something wrong with that money? Oh aye, it disappears down that vast bottomless pit called London.
15

Independence? Bring it On!,

07/05/2008 07:40:50
"Reckon experts"

Whither tame economist Arthur Widminter? Surely he can't have been dropped by the Hootsmans department of negative SNP stories?
16

yockel,

07/05/2008 08:11:16
"Scotland is far from reaching the productivity levels of small independent EU countries"
Spot the difference??
17

beckypumps1,

Fife 07/05/2008 08:45:25
4
So this study was done by Wendys hubby! Well it is in the hootsman after all.
18

Lillig,

07/05/2008 09:10:46
Agree with 3 Senga Jean, 4 ratzo and 16 yockel.

Good comments on this article, except No 9 who should go take a reality check.


19

Wardog,

Buckie 07/05/2008 09:13:52
5 truthsleuth, 07/05/2008 00:39:25

I have no political allegiance I speak as I see.

You won't see much with those onion in front o yer face'
20

megz,

glasgow 07/05/2008 09:22:13
it is america's fault apparently, Gordon brown has been telling us this for quite some time so i surprised the scotsman didn't pick up on that. So the SNP have nothing to worry about as it isn't their fault.
21

Highland Mighty,

07/05/2008 09:24:50
9. It's a shame the SNP supporters on here are again ruining any chance of a mature debate by posting such infantile rubbish.

Regardless, with so many 'economists' on the team, the SNP must have known this was a ridiculous target to set. 20% growth over and above current 2% growth? And when the US is dragging the world down?

This promise can only be described as 'amateurish' so how can we trust the SNP on the economy after independence?

It's just more broken promises along with class sizes, the 1,000 police (a promise the SNP were forced to keep by the Tories), road improvements, student debts, rail improvements and franchises.....

Roll on the next poll and let's see if their lead over Labour is still plummeting. It was 11% in November but it's only 5% now. 4% next month? 3%?
22

Miss H,

07/05/2008 09:35:41
21 It's a funny thing but thus far when everyone has scoffed and said the SNP was being ridiculous they have managed to pull it off, whether that'a sbout making minority government work, the concordat with local government, freezing council tax etc.

You may regret those hasty words,
23

macca 316x2z,

07/05/2008 09:45:19
21 Are you on smack as of last month!

Constituency vote
TNS System Three - CON 12%, LAB 31%, LDEM 11%, SNP 45%
YouGov - CON 13%, LAB 31%, LDEM 15%, SNP 36%
Scottish Opinion - CON 13%, LAB 33%, LDEM 10%, SNP 40%

Regional Vote
TNS System Three - CON 12%, LAB 29%, LDEM 12%, SNP 41%
YouGov - CON 13%, LAB 28%, LDEM 13%, SNP 37%

Even the westminster vote looks good!

TNS System Three - CON 17%, LAB 39%, LDEM 10%, SNP 31%
YouGov - CON 17%, LAB 34%, LDEM 14%, SNP 30%

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1198

24

Wardog,

07/05/2008 10:02:12
23 macca 316x2z, 7/05/2008 09:45:19

He certainly needs a smack to waken those dead eyes from his unionist crusade
25

Highland Mighty,

07/05/2008 10:14:49
23. So you are going to ignore ALL the other polls and just stick to TNS, the only poll to showing increasing support for the SNP (and independence)?
26

macca 316x2z,

07/05/2008 10:23:25
TNS and Yougov
Post some of the recent polls you are talking about.
27

Alfred E. Neuman,

07/05/2008 10:46:23
The shock! The horror! Was Salmond just mouthing off cheap rhetoric when he talked of productivity comparable to other small countries! Never!

I simply do not believe many Scots are lazy smeg-heads, i will not accept there is a high level of union apes in Scotland, what do you mean we lack the skills to trade, all Scotsmen are brilliant at creating spreadsheets and administrative jobs, that is good work and high demand abroad to trade for real goods.
28

The Tin Man,

Over the Rainbow 07/05/2008 11:10:35
In order to further promote economic growth in Scotland, the executive would actually have to instigate pro-growth legislation.

#14 Dave

Barra is a lot more subsidised than London...
29

Porty Nat,

Edinburgh 07/05/2008 11:22:28
#27 - Perhaps you'll forgive me for saying so, but the most egregious example of a 'union ape' round these parts is probably your good self.

Still... keep peeling those bananas with your feet in between postings :-)
30

Alan B,

07/05/2008 11:23:11
"Labour's shadow finance secretary Iain Gray said: "This report should make very worrying reading not just for John Swinney but for all of us. Without increasing growth and productivity, Scotland will be left behind."

The guy is a joke. Labour in their 10yrs in power in scotland did not look like closing the gap between scotlands growth rate and the rest of the uk. And now he expects the snp with less than a yr in charge to have managed it.

The 2017 target was based on being scotland being independent and having the economic powers that woudl acrue available to the government.
31

Jackie Priest,

07/05/2008 11:30:57
Highaldn Blight and Alfred.

Perhaps you missed the overall assessment:

"The picture overall is fairly positive for the government. "

Yes, that's right. Fairly postive, which is better than the unionist negativity that we've been mired in for decades and centuries, isn't it?

Half the targets the SNP set are being met or have been met already, so this article could easily be weighted towards the positive (as if that would ever happen).

The fact is the SNP are aiming high, which is something that doesn't compute in the unionist mentality. Unionists prefer the status quo which is tantamount to doing nothing, attempting nothing and being content with more of the same old nothing.

By aiming high the SNP won't meet every target but will still ended up achieving much more than any Labour or Tory government could ever achieve, and they will of course take us closer to the kind of targets we need to meet.

People in Scotland realise this and this is why they are backing the SNP's approach in their multitudes.

Unionists will ignore the positives, of course, because they prefer to moan and whinge and beat their chests because they simply cannot swallow the fact that the SNP are by far the most efficient and ambitious government Scotland has ever seen.

Posters like you are a good example of the bitter and twisted, bad loser, infantile unionist cringe mentality which has become a fringe element of Scottish politics and which will continue to diminish at an ever-increasing rate which has already almost reached a point on non-exitence.

Scotland will be a happier place without your contstant wialing negative contributions which are mostly abuse anyway, even though you, Highland Blighty, have never been in Scotland in your entire life (who knows about Alfie?). But don't worry, you will be welcomed with open arms if and when you choose to visit. I can assure that the landscapes of Scotland are more impressive even than Switzerland's.
32

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 07/05/2008 11:32:44
Scotland will never reach her economic potential until she is free to set her own tax and investment policies and that means Independence.
33

observer9,

Glasgow 07/05/2008 12:05:00
John Swinney, who is doing a great job, should perhaps have a word with Jim Mather.

As this week he said the Government will not intervene directly to reduce the size of the state sector as the process should only happen "organically rather than imposing it from the top and getting a whole raft of unintended consequences”.

This was in relation to allowing or rather not allowing mainly small innovative Scottish companies access to public sector work. You need only look at the article in both today’s Herald and Scotsman on the utter shambles that is the NHS Western Isles.

If we want growth and betterment for Scotland we have to tap into the dynamic potential wealth creators.

We spend hundreds of millions on the “needs of the neds” and a tiny fraction of that on the people who are struggling to drive their ideas forward.

Globalisation is here and there are very talented people in other countries who also have the same ambitions as our entrepreneurs but they are helped by their governments, not hindered as we are by stifling bureaucracy and administrators who are do not understand that without embracing our own innovators we will plummet on the worlds commercial stage.

I am Scottish and proud of it but we have got to get our commercial house in order.
34

Queen D,

Glasgow 07/05/2008 12:10:54
The economy matters for sure , but I am more interested in the heart and soul of my country.
I no longer wish to be a part of Westminsters foreign policy .
I no longer wish to house WMDs at my back door.
I no longer wish to support the South East of England exclusively.
I no longer wish to be told that Scotland is merely a region and is too small, too stupid to look after its own.
I no longer wish for my country to be treated as an afterthought.
I no longer wish for young Scots soldiers to die in lands we had no right to invade.
I no longer wish for Scots to prop up the Westminster government.
I have sympathy for the areas in England that suffer from being ignored by Westminster and would welcome them to join us.
35

Cauchy Riemann,

Wales 07/05/2008 12:24:24
The SNP targets are certainly aiming very high. GDP growth has trailed behind the UK for many decades. This is something that will take a few years to alter, if indeed it can be.

[Between 1975 - 2005 Scotlands average GDP growth was 1.8%, whilst UK growth was 2.3% Between 1995-2005 the comparison was 2.2% and 2.8%]

It will be interesting to see what things will be like in 2011. To expect a turnaround in one year (which is the tone of this article, or at least the tone of Labour's inane comment) is pure foolishness. It would take some time for the real effect of policies to filter through anyway - effects aren't instantaneous!

Labour's comment by Ian Grey is simply ridiculous. Labour did nothing to make GDP growth comparable with the UK when they were in power - to therefore suggest that Scotland is falling behind for not acheiving this in one year is the comment of an idiot buffoon.

There is a boader picture here. Population growth causes GDP growth. Whilst the UK population growth seems to be ever increasing, Scotlands population projections are one of decline. There is an immediate mismatch here.
36

sm753,

07/05/2008 12:33:27
#34 - Can't resist this one:

"The economy matters for sure , but I am more interested in the heart and soul of my country."

Agreed.

"I no longer wish to be a part of Westminsters foreign policy ."

I do. Better than having an irrelevant foreign policy - as all small tin-pot countries do.

"I no longer wish to house WMDs at my back door."

I do. They kept the peace for 50 years, won the Cold War, and will continue to deter aggression. And they provide decent jobs.

"I no longer wish to support the South East of England exclusively."

You don't. It is a mutual relationship.

"I no longer wish to be told that Scotland is merely a region and is too small, too stupid to look after its own."

No-one tells me that - you should seek out better company. Is this a Nat problem?

"I no longer wish for my country to be treated as an afterthought."

It isn't. Most objective observers would say that Scotland gets AT LEAST its fair share of influence in the UK. Not to mention the spending."

"I no longer wish for young Scots soldiers to die in lands we had no right to invade."

No-one wants our chaps to die. Iraq was a mistake. Afghanistan wasn't. You would just want to abandon our global responsibilities and become another tin-pot little irrelevance, wouldn't you?

"I no longer wish for Scots to prop up the Westminster government."

I wish for Scotland to continue to send its MPs to Westminster where they can play a full role in governing the UK and representing it abroad. Perhaps in a few years a few extra Scots Tories will be part of David Cameron's government!

"I have sympathy for the areas in England that suffer from being ignored by Westminster and would welcome them to join us."

Well , a final note of agreement - but it's irrelevant wishful thinking, like the rest of the Nat agenda.
37

Arfur,

07/05/2008 12:44:17
They have been in power 1 year FFS! The reason its in such a mess is the previous 10 years of cack from Labour and Lib Dum.

They have reduced business rates which will attract companies to Scotland. There are already companies in England fed up of the tax rate down south. If they are going to go somewhere close with low tax rates- where could be an option....duh let me think.....Scotland.
38

Arfur,

07/05/2008 12:44:54
They have been in power 1 year FFS! The reason its in such a mess is the previous 10 years of cack from Labour and Lib Dum.

They have reduced business rates which will attract companies to Scotland. There are already companies in England fed up of the tax rate down south. If they are going to go somewhere close with low tax rates- where could be an option....duh let me think.....Scotland.
39

Arfur,

07/05/2008 12:44:55
They have been in power 1 year FFS! The reason its in such a mess is the previous 10 years of cack from Labour and Lib Dum.

They have reduced business rates which will attract companies to Scotland. There are already companies in England fed up of the tax rate down south. If they are going to go somewhere close with low tax rates- where could be an option....duh let me think.....Scotland.
40

Jackie Priest,

07/05/2008 13:24:49
#36
]
You should have resisted.

Tell me, why do Norway or Denmark not feel the need to have the big shot foreign policies of Britain? Would you call them tin-pot small countries? How come they're much better off than we are? How come they don't need WMDs? What is it with unionists that they want to be the big macho guys of the world? IS this some kind of substitute for having a small dick?

Weren't WMDs responsible for the war in Iraq? So how are they keeping the peace then? And what happens when they get used, which they already have and will be again? WIll that be keeping peace too?

If Scotland gets its fair share in the UK, then why do we have the worst poverty in Western Europe? And where's all the money g0oing that gets taken from our oil? Ah, of course. It gets spent on invasions of Iraq and WMDs!!

Hey, you should come and live abroad witrh me for a few weeks and you can speak to some people (everybody) who think that Scotland is a region of England and that me and you are English, even though we're not! Even though I tell them I'm not!

But you don't really care if Scotland is seen to exist or not, do you, because it's just a tin-pot little country anyway! Is that a unionists thing? To not like little countries?

Oh, if only we lived in your little world where Britain truly was great and master of everyone and all things.
41

ochone,

Sauchie, Clack's 07/05/2008 13:36:25
sm753, that's very strange because the Daily Record, only yesterday, reported one Wendy Alexander as having said,'It's not that Scotland can't go it alone, it's that we (labour) think it would be better for the Scottish people if it didn't, and she didn't even qualify what she meant by alone.

I find it interesting that she only has to mention a referendum on independence and some unionists are out with all the old scare stories, next you will be telling us that we won't be able to receive Coronation Street if were independent, that was alway my favourite, that and 'you will need a passport to get into England'.

How hard you all work at trying to lower the expectations of the people of Scotland, without one word of the faults of the union and the fact that if it had been so great there wouldn't have support for the SNP in the first place, and why is it so many of you seem to speak and act as if Scotland doesn't even have the right to self determination and that it is wrong to even mention it?

BTW, wouldn't it have been nice if cuddly caring Britain had seen to it that those 'chaps' in Iraq and Afganistan had at least been supplied with the right equipment before sending them there, but then again, that's empire building for you!
42

New Town Resident,

07/05/2008 13:57:16
#41. I think you'll find its SNP policy to sign up to the EU Schengen agreement and adopt the EU common external border. Right? (and hardly an independent immigtation policy!). Therefore passports will be needed, just as they are now between the UK and say France.

# Don't Norway and Denmark both have troops in Afghanistan? Think they were also in Iraq also until last year, but I would have to check this?

I think you Nats really need to agreee a common line on what you mean by independence. In or out of NATO? In or out of the Euro? In or out of Schengen? In or out of the CFP? In or out of the CAP?

As far as I can make out the main logic of what Salmond says is that he wants to leave NATO. I can't see much independence in joining Schengen or the EURO -less actually?

So unless you seriously address the issues it just seems to boil down to more public sector government jobs in Edinburgh?

By the way local taxation is in a mess in this country because we can't have a local sales tax (how they do it in the USA). This is because VAT is imposed at the EU level.
43

Jackie Priest,

07/05/2008 14:16:41
#42

"Don't Norway and Denmark both have troops in Afghanistan? Think they were also in Iraq also until last year, but I would have to check this?"

I think so. Poland does anyway. But, you see, according to unionists, tin-pot countries liek Poland aren't big shot enough to have foreign policies, are they?

You can only have foreign policies and contribute to wars if you're a big shot country like Britain, no?

Jesus, you people have the logic of children. You have been completely taken in by the whole Britain is great thing. You cannot think outside of the Britain box. It's unreal. You have been conditioned. Simple as that.

Oh, and our commmon line on what we mean by independence is being able to make independent decisions about things like NATO, the EU, Euro, etc.

That's not too difficult to get, is it?

You, however, apparently need someone else to make your decisions for you.
44

Boggle fey the Bog,

07/05/2008 14:34:10
42 New Town Resident,07/05/2008 13:57:16

BTW local taxation is in a mess in England and Wales, as well as in Scotland but WTF has that got to do with the EU.

The EU doesn't set the VAT, or 'indirect purchase tax levels' the Bluidy Westmnster government does, numptieheid!!

The Scottish Government are trying to make the method of funding local authorites more equitable, by introducing a tax on income to be collected 'locally' (i.e. at a Scotland level) for the use of Scottish 'local authorities'.

It really isnae rocket science ye knaw.
45

sm753,

07/05/2008 14:47:24
40,41,43

Oh dear - Nat-wits reduced to incoherence again, in the process revealing all of their parochial little hang-ups.

Tin-pot little countries can have all the foreign policies they like - they just get ignored, if they don't agree with the big boys.

Tin-pot little countries can send their contingents to foreign wars if they like - you know, a doctor, three nurses and a small dog. They can't achieve very much and they have little say in larger policy. Big countries with large, balanced and reasonably-funded (though I would wish better) - and yes, backed in the last resort by those nukes you no doubt find so horrifying, although I repeat that they happened to prevent WW3 and bring about the collapse of the Soviet dictatorship - send forces which are large and effective enough to achieve something, and have a say.

I have travelled, lived and worked and various parts of the world. I have no problem that the locals are bit unclear about Scotland - as you might be about Iowa, Saskatchewan, Niedersachsen, Maharashtra etc. You just show them the front of your British passport and say "It's the best bit of the UK." It doesn't sound like I'm the one with the p*nis envy issue.

As for being "taken in" by the Union, I have no apology to make for basing my views on reality. The Scotland I see is a distinctive national unit of a large, economically, diplomatically and militarily significant power - indeed, we helped to make it so.

Economically we do OK - we would probably do better if we hadn't built up our own overhang of quasi-socialist baggage over the years, which sadly even the 1980s didn't get rid of.

Politically we do better than OK - devolved parliament (despite its numpty quotient), still over-represented at Westminster, and a glorious record of over-representation in government stretching back decades - even under the supposedly "anti-Scottish" Thatcher!

The Union is fine and so is our place in it. You Nats are the ones who want to risk it
46

Incandescent,

07/05/2008 14:48:44
#40 Jackie Priest

There is no substitute for having a small dick. Oh, wait...
47

Jackie Priest,

07/05/2008 15:13:12
#45

Delusions of grandeur.

I find it amazing that people like you still exist. Your idea of Britain is one that belongs in the 19th century.

You think that Scotland does OK. You think that our absurd levels of poverty and social rot is....OK. These things are not OK. By western european standards, they are freakish. They're the kind of things you expect to find in second and third world countries.

You demonstrate exactly the kind of apathy that has dimished Scotland to a status of regionality that isn't good enough for a people who consider themselves a nation (most of us do, even if you don't).

And, of course, as with the majority of unionist posters here, your attitude is predicated on a right wing capitalist agenda which, not necessarily wrong in itself, is well out of synch with the social demoncary favoured by the majority of Scots.

And then you seem to think that the military capacities of an independent Scotland would somehow provide a lesser contribution to the imperiliastic jaunts of the "big boys" should they be invited to participate.

Since when is a union between nations a requirement of military alliance?

I don't see any union between the UK and US, and yet the UK gives over its very slight military power to US control when the occasion arises.

You live in a political universe that is entirely made up of illusions. You claim you base everything on reality, and yet your version of reality is that the UK is a real country and Scotland isn't. Because it's small.

It's this kind of apathy and ignorance that is exactly why Scotland isn't independent the way that Norway and Poland are (and how dare you refer to the Poles as little people. Their contribution to defeating the Nazis involved sacrifices on a scale you can't imagine. SO much for the tin-pot countries eh?).
48

sm753,

07/05/2008 15:36:41
47

actually I did not refer to the Poles as "little" or "tin-pot". I know all about their historic sacrifices in 1939-45 and well before. In fact most of Poland's history consists of conquests and partitions between larger neighbours. Not really a great argument for independence, is it?

All this discussion has shown me is that the Scots, as a nation, still have a predilection for the chip on the shoulder (or should that be both shoulders?)

It used to be "We're so poor - it's the government's fault."

Now it's "We're so poor - it's the constitution's fault."

Plus ca change. Grow up and concentrate on the real business of competing and surviving in a big, wide, nasty world. Which, by the way, a hugely disruptive and distracting constitutional upheaval would put at risk.
49

John Blackley,

Florida 07/05/2008 15:43:34
I think the report from the CPPR should be taken for what it is (a result of number-crunching statistics) and not mistaken for a slur on the performance of the SNP.

CPPR are, essentially, economists or mathematicians and neither profession has a great track record in the real world. So their report might be useful as a mild warning or signpost to change emphasis but I wouldn't put much more weight in it than that.

The report itself is an academic exercise in foretelling the future. It's not a damning indictment of the SNP, it's not a commentary on previous parties' misrule and it's not Gordon Brown's personal vendetta against Scotland.
50

MadScientist,

Nod 07/05/2008 15:51:25
why don't you all get on with some work instead of wasting time and energy on this? Maybe then productivity will increasae.
51

Jackie Priest,

07/05/2008 16:05:34
#48

Grow up?

Isn't taking responsibility for your own actions and affairs what being grown up is all about?
52

Miss H,

07/05/2008 17:01:40
25 Looks like Gordon Brown's ignoring it doesn't it?
53

Martyk,

07/05/2008 19:24:11
Is Poland a " tin-pot " nation? Hmm. Population 38 million and about one and a half times the size of Britain. Suppose it depends how you measure it. America , Russia , China not tin-pot nations. Everyone else is ?
54

Jwil,

07/05/2008 21:11:44
What the above article fails to say is that the report says that the evidence for these economic indicators was incomplete. (See the Times article today). The Scotchman doing Selective reporting as usual!
55

ochone,

Sauchie Clack's 07/05/2008 23:47:29
What SM 753 means is he needs someone to do his thinking for him and when you read his posts you can understand why that might be no bad thing!

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


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.