Indo-UK News and Discussion - April 2013

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 06 May 2015 19:29

Wooing the desi vote in uk?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 08 May 2015 09:48

Cameron on course to stay at No. 10 with a narrow win.
Labour slaughtered,SNP sweep Scotland.North-South divide to dominate UK politics.Liberals,who they?
Scottish independence certain in the future.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... ower-looms
General election 2015

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general ... toast.html
Election results live: David Cameron set for No 10 in crushing night for Labour

Election exit poll: on these numbers, David Cameron triumphs and Ed Miliband is toast
Scotland and Europe will now dominate British politics

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 May 2015 10:01

scotland is strongly going to demand its pound of flesh.

the thieves ruling over the money laundering and tax haven in city of london will be loathe to share any of the loot.

UK crown jewels imo are not in tower of london. they are
- scottish alcohol industry
- ARM - defacto winner in smartphone cpu industry with intel atom a very distant second
- rolls royce aero engines
- city of london money laundering engine and global network with corrupt and powerful - lot of people have moved their fortunes under HMGs protection and reside in london
- british aerospace

vina · Post by **vina** » 08 May 2015 10:24

I don't give a rat's Musharraf about the UQ elections, but this time, there is a sigh of relief that the insufferable selfrighteous boor , Ed Millipede has been crushed. A treacherous cretin sucking up to the Islamists if there was one and an opportunist anti India nutcase (the entire labour party is) if there was one. Of course, the same labour the fellow travellers of the Kangress and the "liberal brotherhood" sucking up and rubbing each other's back camp. The same one from which one of the Millipedes (don't remember if it was Ed or the brother in whose back he sank the knife into) spend a night in a "Daleet's" shack with Rahul Gandhi, all in the name of helping the poor of course.

Trouble is , if the self same "Daleet" could actually move out of a shack , these kind of limousine liberals will have no more places to go to milk the suckers and shed lachrymose tears. Talk of vested interests in keeping people wretched and in misery.

Good riddance. Au revior Millipede.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 08 May 2015 12:27

SNP wins 56 out of 59 in Scotland! Very very good!

Don't know where, but I had predicted a Labour washout in Scotland, seeing the enthusiasm for the independence referendum.

Labour loses badly! Can't really characterize this as good or bad. At least in the short term, one would be hearing less from "hooman rights" and Kashmir obsessed snobbish Labour a**holes.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 08 May 2015 12:40

Here one can see the %age change!

UKIP is the biggest winner in terms of new voters coming to them. +9.5% (countrywide) and 10.6% in England, 11.2% (Wales), 2.6% (Northern Ireland). Altogether getting 12.6% of the vote.

SNP: +3.2 (countrywide) +30.0% (in Scotland)

Even if "Yes for Independence" got just 45% of Scottish vote, this time SNP has 50% of the vote.

Also Liberal Democrats have collapsed in UK, just as they did in German elections, and don't even have a presence in the Bundestag, considering they didn't get more than 5% vote!

So UK exit from Europe got a good boost (UKIP + some Liberal Democrats => Tory)! Scottish Independence (SNP) got a good boost!

vinod · Post by **vinod** » 08 May 2015 12:56

When it comes to anti-India rhetoric is conservatives any better? I think both are equally bad.... Labour is more pro-islamist than conservatives. That's all I can think of.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 08 May 2015 13:29

Right now in England 55% of people are tending conservative (40.9 Tories + 14.1 UKIP).

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 08 May 2015 15:02

Is there any info on how Hindus and Sikhs in UK voted?

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 08 May 2015 15:27

vinod wrote:When it comes to anti-India rhetoric is conservatives any better? I think both are equally bad.... Labour is more pro-islamist than conservatives. That's all I can think of.

In a competition between pirates, does it matter whether the "throat-slitting" kind or the "death-by-starvation" kind won?

Tuvaluan · Post by **Tuvaluan** » 08 May 2015 19:48

Scotland has elected an scot-paki to the UK parliament acording to the forum's pet troglodyte, shireen mazari. Also, PISS has been renamed SSII (Sissy)

Shireen Mazari @ShireenMazari1
Tasmeena Shaikh of Pak origin won on an SNP ticket from Scotland - will now be in UK Parliament. Congratulations.

This paki jihadi calls herself an anarchist...clearly the first anarchist to work for the military establishment. Only thing missing in pakistan is anarchy.

shireenmazari wrote: Anarchist by temperament! CEO Strategic Technology Resources & SSII; back in PTI fold politically!

Melwyn · Post by **Melwyn** » 08 May 2015 21:35

RaGa's luck rubs into Miliband. Good for him.

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 09 May 2015 05:53

Long term, a labour win would have been preferable as it would hasten the Islamisation of England. Let them experience first hand what they are encouraging in other countries.

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 09 May 2015 06:13

Question:

Let's start to have a grown up debate in this country about who we are and where we want to go and what kind of country we want to build. -Ed Miliband , tiny island, circa 2000's

Answer:

"A tiny island... no one pays any attention" - Vladimir Rangaswamy, svestopol, circa 2000's"

sum · Post by **sum** » 09 May 2015 06:33

Now that Hasan Suroor's other hope, Labour was wiped out ( after INC was in 2014), the thappad seems to have made him write this hilarious piece:
UK polls: David Cameron's Modi moment? No, it was Ed Miliband's Sonia moment

But on reflection I think that any comparison between what happened in India around this time last year and Friday's events in Britain is quite off the mark. Good for a sexy headline in The Pioneer but bad analysis.

First, a Modi victory was never in doubt and it was only a question of how big it would be (a mere "wave"? Or a "tsunami"?)

So, Cameron and Tories' return to power is a far more amazing feat than Modi's. The other big — and politically more significant — difference is that contrary to the media chatter Cameron's triumph doesn't symbolise a profound ideological shift in British attitudes in a way Modi's did in India.
Cameron is not a divisive politician and unlike Modi he is socially liberal. Under him the Tory Party has become more inclusive and forward looking. He has also made serious efforts to reach out to minority groups . Which is in sharp contrast to Modi's record on the issue.
The number of Asian/Indian origin candidates fielded by the Tory party was more than the number of Muslims fielded by the BJP in the 2014 elections.
Let's be clear: Cameron is not Modi; and it's NOT Britain's Modi moment.
It will be more accurate to describe it as Ed Miliband's "Sonia Gandhi moment".

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 09 May 2015 06:52

vina wrote:Of course, the same labour the fellow travellers of the Kangress and the "liberal brotherhood" sucking up and rubbing each other's back camp. The same one from which one of the Millipedes (don't remember if it was Ed or the brother in whose back he sank the knife into) spend a night in a "Daleet's" shack with Rahul Gandhi, all in the name of helping the poor of course.

Has vina ji's account been hacked?

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 09 May 2015 10:28

hanumadu wrote:Long term, a labour win would have been preferable as it would hasten the Islamisation of England. Let them experience first hand what they are encouraging in other countries.

That's good, but first let's see how the Scottish question is solved!

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 09 May 2015 13:04

Cameron will do everything to prevent Scottish devolution. But as it is, he is powerless to prevent it, if SNP decides to go ahead with their plan. Cameron wants to decrease welfare dependence, which is automatically inimical to the interests of left leaning politics. So any action by Cameron to decrease welfare will play into the hands of SNP and their preference to get total independence. Already the Scottish political parties including Labour are grumbling about how Tories and Lib Dems did not give the promised powers after last referendum.

Similarly, a substantial section of Tory supporters in England (UKIP inclined who did not vote UKIP )and those Labour ones in Scotland who do not want devolution from UK, are also are antithetical to the idea of EU. Scottish people in general are pro EU. Loosing Scotland will be hard for English. Loosing EU membership will be a double whammy.

What can Cameron do? Delay Scottish referendum until after EU referendum. They get to keep EU membership, but they may loose Scotland. Either way they loose one or both. Happy days.

Lisa · Post by **Lisa** » 09 May 2015 13:09

Labour lost because of the SNP. A Labour win would have let SNP rule via a coalition, so many voted the Tories in to prevent this. As for the Scots, they are screwed much as Congress is in India. 50+ seats in a 600+ parliament with a hostile English government. What can they REALLY do. Nothing!

Even UKIP got more votes then the SNP (almost 3 times as many), that's how much influence they really have in the UK.

Lisa · Post by **Lisa** » 09 May 2015 13:28

panduranghariji,

You are missing the elephant in the room. English taxes fund the Scottish surplus particularly when crude oils prices are where they are, e.g., free university education. From here will stem English devolution, particularly fiscal leaving the Scots to 'fund' their own freebies. Then will really begin the games of how the Scots will tax their own to fund their promises.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 09 May 2015 13:39

Sturgeon dismisses SNP landslide a mandate for independence vote

Few expect Ms Sturgeon to pursue aggressively the most ambitious element of its election manifesto: full fiscal autonomy, under which Scotland would take control of all tax raising, transferring some funds to the UK government for shared costs such as defence and debt service.

With oil prices in a slump, fiscal autonomy would cost the Scottish budget billions of pounds and the SNP has already sought to play down the goal by tucking it away toward the end of the manifesto and making clear that even if agreed it would not be fully implemented for years.

“They are not going to push this until they know that: A. the public will support it and B. that it can be done without damaging Scotland’s finances,” says Craig McAngus, research fellow at the Centre on Constitutional Change.

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 09 May 2015 19:11

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/vadodara/Family-of-Vadodara-detainee-who-died-at-Yarls-Wood-Detention-Centre-demands-apology-from-UK-govt/

Family of an Anand resident who died at an immigration detention centre in United Kingdom (UK) has demanded an apology for UK government.

Thirty three year old Pinakin Patel, a resident of Bhavanipura village of Anand district's Petlad taluka in Gujarat, had passed away on April 20 at Yarl's Wood Detention Centre in Bedfordshire.

According to Patel's family, Pinakin along with his wife Bhavisha had gone to London for a holiday on visitors visas in February this year.

But the guards of UK's Border Agency doubting their credentials had sent the couple straight from Heathrow Airport to Yarl's Wood Detention Centre.

The couple had maintained before the police that they had planned a ten day holiday which included visiting relatives in United Kingdom and a trip to Scotland.

But when the border guards spotted copies of Bhavisha's education qualifications, the couple was detained. Bhavisha has maintained that she had taken the copies with her as she did not know what documents to bring to the UK.

On April 20, Pinakin, suffered a cardiac arrest at the centre where he died. Bhavisha, the widow, was released only on April 24 following a hunger strike by her fellow detainees.

Pinakin's father Chimanbhai Patel, a farmer, has written letter addressed to Prime Minister Narendra Modi demanding his intervention and investigation from UK government.

"We have also consulted lawyers who have filed a case in UK court seeking a reply from the UK government on the illegal detention of my brother and sister-in-law," said Pinakin's brother Kalapi Patel.

"Although they had a tourist visa valid for six months and return ticket as evidence, they were illegally detained by the guards. Also, there has been no proper investigation in the death of my brother," he said.

gandharva · Post by **gandharva** » 09 May 2015 23:06

Voting is "Shirk"

gandharva · Post by **gandharva** » 09 May 2015 23:25

Are these coal fields operational?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 10 May 2015 01:29

some, but most of them are depleted and the coal mining towns are in many cases 'ghost towns'
the unions were broken 30 years ago by thatcher, but its no surprise that those areas also had the most organised labour movements for generations and form the bedrock of the labour party's support up to today

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 May 2015 14:18

Scotland's independence is now an inevitability and may happen within the next 3 years,as the SNP will drive home the advantage. BoJo (Boris Johnson) has already offered the Scots "federation" as against independence and DC will have to come good on his promises which just tilted the balance of votes at the referendum,or face as I predict even the possibility of a unilateral "Declaration of Independence"just as the "colonies" did in the US of A.

The Scots are hell bent on the removal of UK Trident subs and closure of the Faslane SSBN base,which was also a big eco issue,where billions are being spent on Trident (to flatter the UK's military strength) at the expense of the NHS,public transport,etc. One option seriously being discussed for relocating the Trident subs is of all places....Gibraltar! One can expect some severe Spanish outrage if that is what will happen.Who knows, the Spanish might decide to take over "the rock" just as Putin took over the Crimea!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... dence.html
SNP's dramatic new push for independence
David Cameron to offer key concessions as Scottish Nationalists prepare the ground for a fresh assault

By Tim Ross, and Simon Johnson
09 May 2015

David Cameron started a dramatic battle to save the United Kingdom from break-up on Saturday night as Scottish nationalists prepared the ground for a new referendum on independence.

Fresh from a landslide election result, Alex Salmond declared that Scotland was closer than ever to separating from the UK.

After winning 56 out of 59 seats north of the border, Mr Salmond, who is now an MP, said the SNP’s near clean sweep was a “staging post” towards full independence.

It was the first time that the SNP had suggested it would use its total domination at the polls to press ahead with its plan to split Scotland from the rest of Britain.

• We are now main opposition to Tories, Nicola Sturgeon says
• Can David Cameron save the Union?

Until now, the party leadership has always promised that it would not use the general election results to re-open the debate about independence.

Mr Salmond’s claim immediately provoked outrage from Ruth Davidson, the leader of the Scottish Conservatives, who accused the SNP of misleading voters with pre-election promises that turned out to be “a sham”.

Mr Cameron fought back himself, using his Cabinet reshuffle to promote one of his most determined pro-union ministers to oversee plans to devolve unprecedented powers to the government of Scotland.

Tory story: David Cameron with wife Samantha on polling day (Andrew Parsons / i-Images)

The Prime Minister appointed Chris Grayling, the former justice secretary, to the role of Leader of the Commons, in which he will also lead ground-breaking reforms to the way Parliament works –intended to ban Scottish MPs from being able to have the final say over English laws.

In his first comments only hours into the job, Mr Grayling made it clear that he would take on the SNP to protect Britain from the threat of being broken up by a tide of nationalism north of the border.

Speaking to The Telegraph, Mr Grayling said he would protect the Union by allowing Scotland to have the “strongest” devolved government of any country on Earth.

This would give Scotland the power to run its own affairs – raising certain taxes and setting benefit payments – but the Scottish government would also be held responsible by voters for any decision to increase taxes.

• Welcome to mortified Britain: Full of young Torys who secretly hate themselves
• For the good of the Union, it's time for England to stand up to the Scots

In his new role, Mr Grayling will oversee the most radical and important reforms to the British constitution in centuries. As well as taking charge of further devolution of tax-raising powers to Scotland he will oversee reforms to give English MPs the final say over matters affecting England, so-called “English votes for English laws”.

Mr Cameron has made these reforms central to his re-election programme, and Mr Grayling has previously been a passionate champion of strengthening the powers of English MPs. “We will keep our promise to create the strongest devolved government anywhere in the world for Scotland,” Mr Grayling said.

“But there can’t be a complete constitutional settlement for the United Kingdom unless it also offers fairness to England. We are all passionate about safeguarding the Union, and all of this is essential to preserving it for the future.”

David Cameron and his wife Samantha are applauded by staff upon entering 10 Downing Street as he begins his second term as Prime Minister (Stefan Rousseau/PA)

Privately, senior Tories are happy for the SNP – which wants to end austerity – to be given more powers because the party will pay the price for raising taxes in the electoral system.

Grant Shapps, the Conservative Party chairman, said: “We want to deliver the best devolution in the world. We want, and so does Scotland, to be not only able to spend the money, but have the responsibility to raise it as well.”

Earlier, Jeremy Hunt, the Health Secretary, hinted that the Tories could even go as far as to give Scotland the most radical powers possible while still remaining inside the UK – complete control over all tax and spending, except on defence and foreign affairs, which Ms Sturgeon has demanded.

“I think David Cameron was, in a way, saying that,” Mr Hunt said. “It was very significant that in his acceptance speech in his own constituency and his speech on the steps of No 10, he talked so much about preserving the Union.

“The words he used were that he would give more autonomy to Scotland than any other part or region anywhere in the world.”

Mr Salmond, the former SNP leader, is still a key member of the party and is expected to play a major role at Westminster over the next five years.

Alex Salmond and Christina McKelvie (Allan Milligan)

Asked if Scotland was now closer to independence after the landslide, Mr Salmond said: “Yes, because the SNP now has an overwhelming mandate from the Scottish people to carry forward Scotland’s interests.

The base of the confidence of people in Scotland is growing all the time. Now, obviously the timing of any future referendum is a matter for the Scottish people first and foremost.”

Ms Sturgeon attempted to play down the idea that her party was already campaigning for a new referendum, insisting this was not her immediate goal. However, Conservatives said Mr Salmond’s comments exposed the SNP’s true agenda.

Elsewhere, political parties continued to digest the shock general election results, which saw Nick Clegg, Nigel Farage and Ed Miliband all resign as party leaders on Friday.

On Saturday night, Labour MPs and former Cabinet ministers broke into open warfare over who was to blame for the catastrophic losses which some predicted would keep them out of power until 2025.

Up to 10 Labour MPs prepared to enter the contest to succeed Mr Miliband, while senior figures urged members to “skip a generation” and choose a fresh face, untainted by the past.

• Election 2015 second place results: How it all could have been so different
• Cabinet reshuffle: The MPs who could be in line for a promotion

Mr Cameron, meanwhile, promoted Michael Gove, the former chief whip, to the post of Justice Secretary, while giving his backing to Nicky Morgan, who remains as Education Secretary.

Mark Harper is appointed to the Cabinet for the first time as Chief Whip. However, senior party figures warned up to 60 MPs were preparing to demand that Mr Cameron adopt far tougher plans to scale back the powers of the European Union, before a referendum is held by 2017.

PS:Some of you will remember my posts where I've been predicting Scottish independence for about a decade+.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 10 May 2015 16:09

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015 ... d-32680698

asked whether a UK government offer of full fiscal autonomy - the devolution of all tax and spend powers - within two years would be a "good deal" for Scotland.

She replied: "It would be the responsibility of the Scottish government and our MPs down in the House of Commons to make sure we get a good deal."

She said any move towards full fiscal autonomy created "questions" around issues such as how much Scotland contributed towards reserved areas such as defence, and how much Scotland would pay towards UK debt interest payments.

Responding to former SNP leader Alex Salmond's comments on Saturday that following the party's landslide victory he thought Scotland was now closer to independence, Ms Sturgeon said there was "no disagreement" between them.

She said: "I think Scotland will become an independent country one day. He said he thinks it will be in his lifetime, I hope that's the case."

However, she repeated her previous stance that the election was "not about independence".

She added: "I said expressly to people in Scotland that if they voted SNP, and half of the Scottish population did, I would not take that as an endorsement of independence. I stick to that position.

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 10 May 2015 22:12

Lisa wrote:panduranghariji,

You are missing the elephant in the room. English taxes fund the Scottish surplus particularly when crude oils prices are where they are, e.g., free university education. From here will stem English devolution, particularly fiscal leaving the Scots to 'fund' their own freebies. Then will really begin the games of how the Scots will tax their own to fund their promises.

Lisa ji,
With all respect, the canard that English taxes subsidise Scots is pure hogwash. Look at OECD data. Not the BOE or Office of Budget responsibility data. I am a bit short of time, but I will post data which will help confirm this. Eklavya ji has posted FT link which again speaks the establishment line.

Lisa · Post by **Lisa** » 10 May 2015 22:41

Panduranghariji,

With all due respect, even before you present your data, you really believe that the OECD has better date reference points than the Office of National Statistics in the UK! Its much like saying that IMF has better information on India than the Indian government. Now really....

Eklavya ji has posted a reference that tallies exactly both with my thoughts and for that matter with many in the City. Why should England subsidise Scottish idiocy? Ask any of your colleagues in the City and I almost dare you to find one who says otherwise.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 10 May 2015 23:36

vina wrote:The same one from which one of the Millipedes (don't remember if it was Ed or the brother in whose back he sank the knife into) spend a night in a "Daleet's" shack with Rahul Gandhi, all in the name of helping the poor of course.

Ed Millibands brother. His name IIRC is David Milliband.

Added later:

Yes it is his older brother David Milliband. From Wikipedia (lest we forget the sanctimoniuos british "lord")

David Milliband Wikipedia

India trip[edit]
After his trip to India in 2008 following the Mumbai attacks, Miliband wrote in an article that "resolution of the dispute over Kashmir would help deny extremists in the region one of their main calls to arms, and allow Pakistani authorities to focus more effectively on tackling the threat on their western borders".[43] This sparked an angry response from the Indian government, whose long standing policy had been not to accept any third party involvement in the dispute of Kashmir. An Indian analyst suggested that his tone implied that India must shoulder some of the responsibility because of its policies in Kashmir.[44] Some reports also said that Miliband's tone towards the Indian Prime Minister and the Finance Minister had been aggressive, and that he had been excused for being a "young man".[45][46]

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 11 May 2015 10:31

If memory serves, Ed pushed out Dave in a leadership battle for Labour. Dave must be feeling a little bit vindicated now... though there will no doubt be commiserations all around, no doubt.

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 12 May 2015 22:54

Lisa wrote:Panduranghariji,

With all due respect, even before you present your data, you really believe that the OECD has better date reference points than the Office of National Statistics in the UK! Its much like saying that IMF has better information on India than the Indian government. Now really....

Eklavya ji has posted a reference that tallies exactly both with my thoughts and for that matter with many in the City. Why should England subsidise Scottish idiocy? Ask any of your colleagues in the City and I almost dare you to find one who says otherwise.

I am afraid you need to read a certain David Rosie who has written extensively about this. OECD data is better because it is unbiased. OBR data is fudged by the parties in power who have a vested interest to keep UK together. If Scots were actually subsidised, you got to wonder why Thatcher (possibly the strongest PM in recent times) could not prevent more dissolution of power to West Lothian? Thatcher did what she had to with industries but still she could not cajole a few Scottsmen? Come on. Either thats a disingenuous argument or the realities forced her to be careful. There has been a progressive increase in Scottish powers and if Scots do get to raise income tax, is there any difference left in more devolved powers as Westminster says and complete independence as SNP says?

Another aspect is the City of London via the banking businesses raises a lot of taxes which are non reproducible. Oil is just a similar non reproducible income. However, one is beneficial to humanity while the other one is not. Take oil out of equation and the balance tips in favour of union. However, take City of London out of equation, the balance breaks in favour of Independant Scotland.

Lisa · Post by **Lisa** » 13 May 2015 01:11

panduranghari wrote:
Lisa wrote:Panduranghariji,

With all due respect, even before you present your data, you really believe that the OECD has better date reference points than the Office of National Statistics in the UK! Its much like saying that IMF has better information on India than the Indian government. Now really....

Eklavya ji has posted a reference that tallies exactly both with my thoughts and for that matter with many in the City. Why should England subsidise Scottish idiocy? Ask any of your colleagues in the City and I almost dare you to find one who says otherwise.
I am afraid you need to read a certain David Rosie who has written extensively about this. OECD data is better because it is unbiased. OBR data is fudged by the parties in power who have a vested interest to keep UK together. If Scots were actually subsidised, you got to wonder why Thatcher (possibly the strongest PM in recent times) could not prevent more dissolution of power to West Lothian? Thatcher did what she had to with industries but still she could not cajole a few Scottsmen? Come on. Either thats a disingenuous argument or the realities forced her to be careful. There has been a progressive increase in Scottish powers and if Scots do get to raise income tax, is there any difference left in more devolved powers as Westminster says and complete independence as SNP says?

Another aspect is the City of London via the banking businesses raises a lot of taxes which are non reproducible. Oil is just a similar non reproducible income. However, one is beneficial to humanity while the other one is not. Take oil out of equation and the balance tips in favour of union. However, take City of London out of equation, the balance breaks in favour of Independant Scotland.

Panduranghariji,

I quote from

Public Expenditure by country and region - Commons Library Standard Note Published 13 March 2015

"In 2013/14, public spending per head in the UK as a whole was £8,936. In England, it was £8,678 (3% below the UK average). This compares with:

• Scotland: £10,275 (15% above the UK average)

• Wales: £9,924 (11% above the UK average)

• Northern Ireland £10,961 (23% above the UK average).

Among the English regions, public spending per head was lowest in the South East at £7,756 (13% below the UK average) and highest in London at £9,866 (10% higher than the UK average)."

Please note source and more importantly the date. Kindly provide your source and reference, ideally identifying where the OECD got its date from if its not from the Office Of National Statistics.

ADDED LATER,

Just for comparison, Gross GVA of London alone is £309 Billion with a population of 8.417 Million. The whole of Scotland has a GVA of £106 Billion with a population of 5.328 million ie an individuals GVA in London is almost TWICE that of one from Scotland.

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 13 May 2015 23:42

The per head figure is used all the time, but it does not include the net contribution to taxation. The expenditure overall in the South West of England is the lowest in UK but its contribution to the exchequer is just as low. The tax generated in London alone is more than all the rest of UK put together and some. Proportional public expenditure in London is just as high.

However, even when oil and gas revenues are excluded, estimated tax receipts per head in Scotland are broadly equivalent to the UK figure. When Scotland's oil and gas receipts are added, tax revenue per head in Scotland is nearly 20 per cent higher than the UK average. This data is OECD data which includes the government provided data and GERS data.

Some links for your perusal.

http://www.oecd.org/unitedkingdom/49170234.pdf
http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2013/06/9241/downloads
http://www.oecd.org/ctp/tax-policy/tax- ... ateCaptial
http://www.oecd.org/social/labour/47319830.pdf

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 May 2015 02:51

Knock it off you both.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 May 2015 18:26

Manchester and the North want to join an independent Scotland!
A poll found that over 70% of the north/Manchester wanted to join a new independent Scotland and would be warmly welcomed as well.More problems for Cameron.

Could the North really break away from the rest of Britain and become part of 'New Scotland'?
http://www.independent.co.uk/

Jon Stone

A petition calling for the North to secede from England and become part of Scotland has got over 28,000 signatures. How practical would this be?

Where would become part of Scotland?

The Angel of the North in Gateshead, after the year's first wave of heavy snow The authors of the original petition have drawn a line south of Sheffield, Liverpool, and Hull.

The new border would run between the River Dee and the mouth of The Humber, with the three UK regions of the North West, the North East, and Yorkshire and the Humber included.
Stoke, Nottingham, and Derby would narrowly miss out on being part of New Scotland.

Why do people want it to happen?

David Cameron hosts the first Cabinet meeting of his new Government in Downing Street The petitioners feel that the Government of the UK is “becoming increasingly irrelevant to the north of England”.

The only cabinet minister with a seat in the North of England is George Osborne himself, who represents Tatton and Cheshire.

“The needs and challenges of the north cannot be understood by the endless parade of old Etonions lining the frontbenches of the House of Commons. The north of England should join the newly independent Scotland and regain control over its own destiny,” they say.

“We, the people of the north, demand that in the event that Scotland becomes independent the border between England and the New Scotland be.

The petition comes after an election in which Scotland was swept by an SNP positioning itself to the left of the Labour party, a stance apparently appealing to many northern cities. A poll before the election found that millions of people in England and Wales would vote SNP if given the opption.

How could the North join Scotland?

Northern secession to Scotland would face number of significant hurdles. At the very least, there is a precedent that a referendum would have to be held and won.

After a referendum, the results would have to be accepted by both the UK government and the Scottish government.

But even getting to the point at which a referendum was held would be difficult. The north as a whole has no regional assembly or parliament like Scotland in which such a debate could be conducted and separatist politicians elected to.

Realistically, individual local councils would either have to hold referenda, or a vote would have to be organised independently of the state using civil society organisations.

It would be nigh-on impossible to get all the 70+ northern local authorities to agree to the former, while the latter would probably be ignored by central government.

If a referendum was secured it would be a huge turnaround from the one held under the last Labour government where the North East rejected even having a regional assembly.

Border towns could in theory hold local referendums and secede in a piecemeal manner. Other possibilities like unilateral annexation of the North by the Scottish Parliament or armed insurrection are even more remote possibilities.

Has this ever happened anywhere before?

Ukrainian soldiers during the conflict with pro-Russian separatists The good news for secessionists is that transfers of territory between states have historically been fairly common. The bad news is that annexations have unfortunately have historically usually involved violence.

The most recent examples tend to involve Russia. South Ossetia, a disputed territory in the caucasus, is being absorbed into Russia after a brief war in 2008. A 1992 referendum held in the region was not recognised as valid by most countries.

The Crimea has also been annexed from Ukraine by Russia, though again under circumstances of conflict. A referendum was held in the territory in 2014, though again, it was not widely recognised.

It could be argued that conversely, many former constituent republics of the USSR were transferred to the European Union after gaining national independence.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... n-scotland
Should the north of England become part of Scotland?

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 17 May 2015 01:31

UK navy seize Indian fishing boats off Diego Garcia

Brishits being Brishits.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 17 May 2015 02:55

Should the north of England become part of Scotland?

Hell, why not. Jolly good I say.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 17 May 2015 12:20

Why homeless Britons are turning to the Sikh community for food:
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-31557192

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 17 May 2015 12:22

Decline in Indo-Brit ties.

http://thediplomat.com/2015/05/britain- ... -courtier/

Britain-India: From Courted to Courtier
What accounts for New Delhi’s relative indifference to London’s overtures?
By Shairee Malhotra
May 17, 2015

Making his first official trip to Europe, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited France, Germany and Canada in early April this year. His agenda: acquiring Rafale fighter jets, boosting Indian manufacturing through the Make in India campaign, urging the EU to move forward on a stalled free trade agreement, and attracting trade and investment.

Although Modi has said that he “usually tries to visit two to four nations together” in convenient clusters, the U.K. was not on his itinerary, despite some vigorous courting. While Britain has erected a statue of Mahatma Gandhi in London’s Parliament Square in an attempt to entice India, the former colonial power finds itself on the sidelines.

In 2014, five prominent U.K. politicians made official visits to India, from former Foreign Secretary William Hague to Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne and former Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg. Indeed, Prime Minister David Cameron himself has visited India a whooping three times since assuming office in 2010, including twice in 2013, professing that India is Britain’s “partner of choice” and “relations with India are at the top of the U.K.’s foreign policy priorities.” In 2012, Britain was among the first countries to withdraw its boycott of Modi over his alleged complicity in the 2002 Gujarat riots – the U.S. only followed suit in 2014. In addition, Britain has steadily supported India’s bid for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.

Yet, the traffic has been largely one way, and interestingly, no Indian prime minister has visited the UK since Atal Bihari Vajpayee in 2001, barring Manmohan Singh’s attendance at the 2009 G-20 Summit in London, which naturally did not focus on the bilateral; and notwithstanding Finance Minister Arun Jaitley’s recent March visit to London, few Indian officials have done so.

With the U.K. increasingly moving away from the limited colonial outlook that exemplified its view of India in earlier decades, what explains New Delhi’s indifferent response towards London’s overtures, and the U.K.’s relegation in India’s political, economic, and international calculations?

Despite a deep historical legacy, cultural bonds bridging centuries, a prominent Indian diaspora numbering 2 million, strong educational ties, $15.8 billion in trade in favor of India, and a strong economic relationship with major investments on both sides, Britain is among a host of nations hoping to capitalize on India’s flourishing economy and the opening of its burgeoning defense industry to foreign investment through which it can possibly carve a role for itself in Asia and feature more prominently in the region. As the Economist notes, “Today everyone wants to be best pals with India.”

Diminishing Britain’s influence is potent competition from the exporting states of Japan, France and Germany, which have each created an efficient niche. The U.K.’s attempts to tap into India’s budding defense industry have been impeded by India’s diversification of defense sources, including its widespread military links with France – boosted by the latter’s refusal to condemn India’s 1998 nuclear tests – and the U.K.’s failure to secure the sale of its Eurofighter Typhoon jets, with India opting for the lower cost French Dassault Rafaele jets instead, making France India’s largest European defense partner. (The U.K.’s offer of its Eurofighter jets to India has been recently renewed by Cameron, who claims that his deal is better.) German industrial expertise can contribute to India’s development and infrastructure projects including rail networks and smart cities, as reiterated by Steinruecke of the Indo-German Chamber of Commerce. Japanese technology, investments, and aid in India’s infrastructure projects, including the construction of smart cities, Delhi’s mass rapid transit system, and the Delhi-Mumbai industrial corridor, plans to further defense and security cooperation, not least to counter Chinese aggression, in return for rejuvenation of its moribund economy through exports and investments to a rapidly flourishing India, have paved the way for a promising partnership.

Despite Cameron’s latest assertion that Britain is a better partner for Modi’s Make in India campaign, in comparison to the likes of Germany and Japan, the U.K. appears to have comparatively little of an exclusive or a unique nature to offer India. Certainly, India can benefit from Britain’s impressive historical expertise and know-how in technology and innovation. Additionally, a large number of British firms operate in India, not least Vodafone, Unilever, Diageo, and British American Tobacco. Indian firms prefer Britain for FDI, and British banks lend more to India than any other country. But while countries like Japan and Germany have been eager to invest in India’s growing economy and the large number of infrastructure projects, the U.K. has been more reluctant to do so, including plans to invest in India’s ambitious 1,000 km Mumbai-Bangalore corridor. Strategic cooperation between India and Britain is being strengthened, especially in the realms of counter-terrorism and civil nuclear cooperation. However, the U.K. has concurrently pressed for a bigger role for Pakistan in Afghanistan, continuing its historic pro-Pakistan incline – something that naturally does not sit well with India.

Clearly, India’s foreign policy focus has shifted to the Indo-Pacific, yet even within Europe, Britain has been consigned to the backburner. Though the relationship between the two countries will likely continue to be affable and mutually constructive, and substantial economic, strategic and military gains will be achieved for both sides, Britain will not be India’s only reciprocal “partner of choice” as Cameron wishes, and it is far-fetched to think ties can develop into a “special relationship.”

Far from writer Patrick French’s critique of Britain’s narrow-minded colonial mindset and its subsequent incapability to fathom how India is growing, Britain’s recent attitude exhibits a pragmatic necessity and appreciation of engaging with a rising India. India’s reactions are also characterized by pragmatic reflections, including an acknowledgement of Britain’s fading international clout. In the transactional and ephemeral world of international relations, historical links and shared values matter, but ultimately the future of the relationship will depend on India’s evaluation of what it derives from the ties. This will determine where Britain stands on India’s radar and how much political weight India is willing to invest to deepen the level of engagement.

Overall, the evolving Indo-British relationship reflects shifting geopolitical realities, including a significant change in the global balance of power, a multipolar world in which India is an emerging power, and a Britain that is no longer the great power it once was.

Shairee Malhotra is a Mumbai-based analyst. She has an MA International Relations from Queen Mary University of London, and has worked as a researcher at foreign policy think tank Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations.