On last nights debate the Plaid leader said that funding for Wales is a lot less than the funding that Scotland gets.
Why is this? (if true)

IMO because the Scots have negotiated a better deal not least due to their constant calls for independence lead to concessions being granted instead of parliamentary powers. Also the whole “its our oil” argument was part of it. Now they have the parliamentary powers their special financial treatment (Barnet formula) should end. They can set their own taxes and raise their own extra money of they wish.

In the consitutional mess that is the UK, Scotland has always had a greater level of autonomy than Wales. Take, for example, the NHS. The Scottish NHS is a completely different organisation from that in Englandandwales. Other civil service and government, quasi-government organisations follow the same principles.

The Barnett Formula was developed to allow for the greater relative costs of delivering these services over a widespread, thinly populated area. That Wales has seen less funding is because Westminster hasn’t taken specific Welsh needs into consideration. The North East is another area that has suffered in this way. Blame too much concentration of expenditure on the South East.

The problem is that Barnett picked as a starting point the level of public spending in place at the time – in 1978. At that time, for other reasons, spending per head was higher in Scotland than in Wales. Barnett then says how funding in Scotland, Wales and NI is adjusted as funding in England varies, from that starting point.

It’s a historic thing, because Barnett was meant to be temporary.

I think Barnett should go too, replaced by full fiscal autonomy for Scotland.

I think Barnett should go too, replaced by full fiscal autonomy for Scotland.

You missed the latest from the DO – so long as we are protected by rUK in case of a fall in oil prices. You don’t need to make it up!

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/279094ba-e208-11e4-9995-00144feab7de.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3XUKwvrA2

One view…

http://www.clickonwales.org/2014/08/public-spending-levels-in-wales-scotland-and-the-uk/

NI has even more than Scotland, so it can pay for two of everything, and bribe the terrorists not to get onto national news.

[Blame too much concentration of expenditure on the South East. ] is that true??? it looks like the Barnett formula provides significantly more than for NI,S & W than E

The Barnett formula hasn’t remained static at 1978 levels

You missed the latest from the DO – so long as we are protected by rUK in case of a fall in oil prices. You don’t need to make it up!

Can’t be bothered working out who DO is, but I don’t share that opinion. Full Fiscal Autonomy with borrowing powers just like we’d have if we were independent, that’s what my preferred solution is.

The Barnett formula hasn’t remained static at 1978 levels

But as I understand it, the ratio of funding levels between the countries has.

Fun fact: Barnett applies to the whole of the UK, not just Scotland.

The inconsitencies don’t stop there, the three different assemblies/governments have varying powers which should really be brought into alignment with each other IMO, if that means full fiscal autonomy for all then so be it.

Jambalaya – first reply and you’re already taking the ‘subsidy junky’ approach, bravo.

On last nights debate the Plaid leader said that funding for Wales is a lot less than the funding that Scotland gets.
Why is this? (if true)

Also bear in mind that it’s something that varies widely from region to region as well – so while you might see £8,678 quoted for England as the lowest region and £10,961 for Ireland as the highest it’s also the case that in England it varies from £7,950 as the lowest for the “East” region up to £9,866 for London as the highest (and which makes funding per head for London close to the funding per head for Wales).

Given that the populations of Wales & Scotland are similar & that Wales is/has suffered more in recent decades then surely Wales should be getting a larger, fairer slice of the pie?

“Good money after bad” is the phrase that springs to mind when considering upping Welsh funding.

The bigger question for me is why is public funding in London so high. In 2009/10 and 2010/11 it was higher than in Scotland.

As opposed to anything that goes into Glasgow, a city with 2nd world levels of health?

As opposed to anything that goes into Glasgow, a city with 2nd world levels of health?

I’m sure the public spending in Glasgow is indeed very high.

Given that the populations of Wales & Scotland are similar

As in, not…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom

Scotland
Population 5.3m
Land 79,000km2

Wales
Population 3.0m
Land 21,000km2

Almost twice the population and nearly 4 times the area

Fair enough, I was under the impression the populations were roughly around 4.5 million. However, is the funding per capita & if so why is Scotland receiving more when it can be argued Wales needs it more?
Wales also has terrain that makes it more costly to deliver services to the population.

Wales also has terrain that makes it more costly to deliver services to the population.

I take it you’ve never been to Scotland? 🙄

My point, was that its not only Scotland that has difficult landscapes..

My point, was that its not only Scotland that has difficult landscapes..

London doesn’t have a difficult landscape but prior to the last couple of years the spend there per head was higher than in Scotland or Wales.

The bigger question for me is why is public funding in London so high. In 2009/10 and 2010/11 it was higher than in Scotland.

London pays £34bn in taxes more than it receives in public spending, its a massive contributor to the rest of the UK. IMO I think this is normal for a capital city.

@squirrelking – I am just saying now they have tax raising powers they should perhaps consider funding themselves ?

@ben, full autonomy isn’t going to work, we cannot have Scotland competing with the UK on corporation tax for example. The government is proposing that for Northern Ireland given its land border with Ireland. Borrowing powers make no sense unless Scotland has its own central bank to support those commitments, the SNP where not proposing to have one of those come independence. They just wanted to borrow and the the UK stand behind them, much like Greece with the eurozone.

However, is the funding per capita & if so why is Scotland receiving more when it can be argued Wales needs it more?

I agree 😈 as I like the Welsh more than the Scots.
Living in the South East (and therefore a profit centre for rUK rather than a cost centre) shurely we get some say?

London pays £34bn in taxes more than it receives in public spending, its a massive contributor to the rest of the UK. IMO I think this is normal for a capital city.

That may well be, however my point is that it’s a lot more complicated than just “Scotland gets more than England” etc.

Could mean anything, I believe per head Wales gets more than Scotland, but in Pounds and Pence Scotland gets more because, it’s a got a much bigger population.

As a Welshman I’m always slightly saddened when the question of funding comes up, I know in my heart that Wales suffered more than even Scotland and the North of England when the UK evolved from a Production and Manufacturing Nation to a Financial and Services Nation – but it seems we’re stuck between a rock and a hard place – if we left the UK (not that I want to) we could use our massively deflated currency to make it very cheap to make stuff here again and we might prosper and build our own infrastructure – but even now, 30 years or so since the pits and factories closed – we can’t really look after ourselves – we have to constantly ask for more money from the union to pay the bills.

The London gets more than Wales/Scotland thing was brought up in this comedy Paxman interview with Plaid Cymru Econo-bloke

[video]https://youtu.be/1Gy7f8vP2QY[/video]

Plaid happy to take English money (+ want more) and yet they’re doing everything they can to get the English out of Wales. Hmmm.

I am just saying now they have tax raising powers they should perhaps consider funding themselves ?

The tax raising is also offset against block grant so your point wouldn’t work unless they raised taxes significantly. Congratulations, you now send even more folk down south to feed the monster.

How does that differ from the Welsh NHS ?

Are Plaid trying to get English people out of Wales? Not heard of anything like that.
I just think that Wales deserves at least parity with Scotland.

London pays £34bn in taxes more than it receives in public spending, its a massive contributor to the rest of the UK. IMO I think this is normal for a capital city.

isn’t this cos tax as counted as where the head office is…so all those distilleries in Scotland end up being counted as contributing millions in tax in London, rather than in Stoneybridge? Same goes with BP/Shell. If head offices were in Edinburgh then London wouldn’t be counted as “generating” those tax reciepts

Gwaelod

It was funny true, but like his friends north of the border, he was being somewhat economical with the truth.

The 115 number he kept quoting was either Scotland now or London in 2011/12. He tried to pretend it was London now. But Paxo was correct. He was not.

Should also note that spending per head in London doesn’t generally count infrastructure stuff – Crossrail, HS2 preparations, Millennium Dome etc. Even things like the Olympics which happened in London but were subsidised by people all over the UK.

How does that differ from the Welsh NHS ?

Different history with NHS Scotland been setup at the same time of NHS England and Wales in 1948 – post 1999 devolution (both Scotland and Wales) unsure.

Should also note that spending per head in London doesn’t generally count infrastructure stuff – Crossrail, HS2 preparations, Millennium Dome etc. Even things like the Olympics which happened in London but were subsidised by people all over the UK.

And reimbursed (in theory) by Barnett, IIRC though the Olympics were a ‘special case’ outside of Barnett, Crossrail isn’t.

True, but it still skews the spending in London compared to other parts of England.

Olympics, where they subsidized by rest of the UK ? I recall Londoners paid and will pay more in council tax ? Not sure don’t know. Maybe the rest of the country did pay more but we’ve athletes from all over the UK who’ve benefited profile wise as well as financially. Plus there is the positive image of the UK the games created.

Crossrail – I think that project was included in the calculation of London paying £34bn more than is spent on it. Not sure though.

Sharkbait are the Welsh trying to get the English out ? Really ? I appreciate the second home buying isn’t so popular with some. I’ve some sailing friends who have just retired (in their mid 50’s) to Pembrokeshire, yes they have bought a nice property with stables but they will be spending money there with horses etc plus all of us driving out to see them spending more money locally. All good for Wales ?

Millenium dome was a bad joke, at least O2 have done something with it. Millenium Stadium has been a big success.

Scottish whisky profits may indeed be counted at head office (Diagio etc) but I suspect they are not particularly significant amounts just highly symbolic. I assume they still get the Gordon Brown tax breaks.

I appreciate the second home buying isn’t so popular with some.

In N Wales, nothing would make PC happier.
Last year I inherited the house that my parents bought nearly 40 years ago in a popular welsh village. We have always spent quote a lot of time there (pretty much every holiday) and yet in 2017 we will be paying 200% council tax as the council try to force second home owners (i.e. English) out of the houses that were specifically built as holiday homes.
This is despite there being no locals to occupy the houses as there are very few jobs other than those created by tourism.

2017 we will be paying 200% council tax as the council try to force second home owners

I would like to see that applied across the country – too many second homes and not enough houses for people. It’s killing many rural villages.
Does the country need more houses to be built or should we just use up the empty houses first?

I agree that in some locations a local workforce is needed for local industries and in these cases large numbers of second homes does not help.
But many second homes are located where tourism is the major [or even the only] local industry and it can be argued that a number of these villages only survive because of this tourism. Make it too expensive to have a house there (holiday rental or otherwise) and tourism diminished starting a spiral into ‘closure’.

its easy to be selective… for example …Scotland gets twice the rate of civil service Jobs that E & W gets and NI gets 1 7th of share that Scotland gets… anyone can play games with statistics… or comment about large projects in the capital of the UK I’m sure there are lots of white elephants scattered arround the UK

the truth is that the formula doesn’t work