click to enlarge
Scotland appears to be doing rather better than many parts of the UK but this may well be down to the fact we have many more employed in the public sector. These figures also don't show the 'hidden' unemployment figures.
My thanks to Goodnight Vienna
Posts
33 comments:
You're correct about public sector employment in Scotland. Last time it was highlighted, I think it was around 50% of the working population employed by local authorities, civil service and NHS in low-paid but relatively secure jobs. It's just about sustainable with Scotland as part of the larger United Kingdom, but would be complete madness for an independent nation of our size. That's why need to move to a more skilled workforce within higher-value industries.
Hello Mek, but which party will have the courage to reduce the public sector? That would be electoral suicide in some ways, although I'd vote for a party that was strong enough to do it.
Sorry folks nut the Public sector employment in Scotland, as of 3rd quarter 2008 was 22.6% which is actually down from 22.8% in 1999.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2008/12/17095920
I think the figure are a little bit lower for London etc but I cannot find the actual figures
Sorry folks nut the Public sector employment in Scotland, as of 3rd quarter 2008 was 22.6% which is actually down from 22.8% in 1999.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2008/12/17095920
I think the figure are a little bit lower for London etc but I cannot find the actual figures
Double bugger
Well Subrosa, if you and enough other voters did actually vote for a Party which proposed reducing the size of the public sector then it wouldn't be political suicide would it?
Whether enough such votes would materialise in the real world is unfortunately extremely unlikely. Most of Scotland has remained sadly loyal to the destructive socialist policies of Labour for many decades, only to begin to transfer their loyalties to the marginally less socialist SNP in recent years, that I suspect such a 'turkeys voting for Christmas' scenario is unlikely. Why, if the SNP seriously proposed a 'slash the State' policy agenda, even I who am an arch-Unionist might be forced to reconsider ... lol.
I may dislike this, and I do, but I am nothing if not a realist. I would love for my fellow Scots and the rest of the UK to prove me wrong.
Bugger lugs, I still think we're higher than the average in England. I'll look for the stats when I've time.
No of course it wouldn't Bill, but who would be brave enough because Scotland would possibly return to the culture of voting labour. It'll be a few years before that generation have gone then perhaps it will change.
Ooops that's just what you've said!
My comment was not that the Public Sector Employment was desirable, considering my own experience, but that it was no 50% or anything like it in Scotland.
You didn't say it but Mek did.
I try not to correct e not factually posters who I feel talk keich or say things that are factually correct.
In this case Mek said 50% and it is another of these Daily Torygraph facts and figures which creep into factuality, or so they hope.
cf Scotland has been subsidised by England since Cromwell was an alter boy.
I a a grumpy bugger and do not wish to appear to savage a poser who is not a Numpty.
So I chose a neutral type post and if it got up YOUR nose well tough Twitty.
Loads of love you wee cracker
French kisses etc
This is a nice recent link from the Government: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Labour-Market/TrendPublicSectorEmp
It says public sector employment in Scotland was 24.9%. So (if I can be cheeky) I was half right... ;-)
Mek, you can be as cheeky as you like but I still say we have more public service workers than most of England. In a generation of two that will change. The likes of the council tax will hopefully be controlled centrally instead of 32 councils doing it individually.
Hopefully, of course, there won't be a council tax. The sensible outcome is a tax which is collected by HMRC.
You are a grumpy bugger Bugger Lugs but hey, who says you can't be?
Mek's not a numpty BL, he was repeating what we're told over and over again.
Nothing much gets up my nose these days - sad but true.
French kisses? Naw, dinnae like sharing anyone's garlic. :)
"It's just about sustainable with Scotland as part of the larger United Kingdom."
I suspect that this is largely true, but I'll bet the UK government and the Scottish Parliament aren't going out of their way to discover and publish the 'true' figures.
A little Barnett Formula goes a long way...
England £7,121
Scotland £8,623
Wales £8,139
Northern Ireland £9,385
...and will support spending and employment in the Scottish private sector too.
Jeez Conan, that's not fame, that's embarrassing. I've only deleted your comment because I don't want the Scotsman getting hits from my readers.
Jeez subrosa, did I upset you?
Sorry if I did :¬(
Crossed messages, phew I thought you were peed off wi'me.
subrosa,
Dear me, what have you been up to? French kisses and Conan getting censored - is nothing sacred? No wonder we wee frees are up in arms - purely platonically of course.
Hope you like your e-mail and I'd be interested to know your choice!
Not at all Conan, but my work doesn't get mentioned on the blog here. Politics and it aren't a good mix :)
Jings brownlie, I'm getting hit from every angle and I just came on here to have a wee game of bridge! Poor Conan, I hope he's not upset.
French kisses? Only in France these days. :)
At times like this I think the thought of even a wee free with open arms would be welcome.
NNW, you missed out London which I believe has the highest figure.
Have you ever visited remote parts of Scotland? Have you ever visited areas of Glasgow which have been left to decay by a labour party for generations?
Perhaps if you have then you would realise why extra money is needed.
Then again of course, there's the matter of oil, but I don't want to upset you, so I won't do there.
It's easy enough to say you'd like the public sector cut - but which services would you get rid of? The usual way is to privatise esential services to the most vulnerable - folks with no voice.
Services are still deliverred but by private companies or agencies who hire part time workers at minimum wage with no benefits. Turn over of workers is high, quality of service is low, but since the customer/client/consumer is marginalised without a voice who cares?
So all those who want cuts - list the ones you'd make.
Right scunnert, here's one.
Centralise the collection of the community charge. Paying for it to be done by 32 individual councils is a massive waste of money.
"Have you ever visited remote parts of Scotland?"
Yes.
{Save the Orkneys, if they count.}
'Have you ever visited areas of Glasgow which have been left to decay by a labour party for generations?'
Only by accident. I tend to drive through Glasgow as fast as I can - Lord help me if I get lost inside it - so few road signs.
I'm a unionist and so my point was intended to illustrate that perhaps one reason Scotland's not feeling the pinch yet may be down to Barnett.
And yes, our joint polity's capital city does get a big cut -though not per capita according to Wikipedia [if you believe Wikipedia, that is!] I'm none too thrilled about that either; though we do better in the North West than some other English regions.
North East £8,177 - 111% of UK average identifiable expenditure
North West £7,798 - 106%
Yorkshire and Humberside £7,188 - 98%
East Midlands £6,491 - 88%
West Midlands £7,065 - 96%
Eastern £6,144 - 83%
London £8,404 - 114%
South East £6,304 - 86%
South West £6,677 - 91%
and again:
England £7,121
Scotland £8,623
Wales £8,139
Northern Ireland £9,385
If one accepts the union then regional subsidisation is a likely result of national politics - but it doesn't have to feel good - especially that high Northern Ireland rating considering how it has been extorted.
At least the Scots and the Welsh asked politely and won it through peaceful means and that matters a lot.
However, as you wrote above you don't seem to be too happy with big-spending government yourself.
Barnett's part of that.
So what's the solution within the Union?
NNW, I have never given consideration to any solution within the union because I am a supporter of independence.
The solution is for Scotland to leave the union and learn how to live within its means. It will be a hard lesson and take a generation or two, but if the Scots are wise they will grasp it with both hands.
Safely in the mellow yellow here, despite being underfunded as per NWWs figures.
That graphic shows how Labours 12 years in power have hit its' own core areas worst, no wonder they are heading for oblivion.
scunnert
It's easy enough to say you'd like the public sector cut - but which services would you get rid of? The usual way is to privatise esential services to the most vulnerable - folks with no voice.
# All child-related benefits, tax credits, disregards and premiums after the third child - tied to the mother's National Insurance number. No further subsistence benefit after the tenth birthday of the first child. She can marry or work after that. Repeat breeders aren't vulnerable: they're randy and fertile and willing for everyone else to pick up the tab for life.
# Jobseeker's Allowance for single adults after three months. Pay them dole plus expenses and sell their contracts to job agencies.
Why not have people whose surnames begin with 'O' and 'Mac' and end with 's' or 'son' pick the turnips?
# The local education authorities.
# The Environment Agency.
# Every single state funded 'charity.'
# The General Medical Council.
# The General Teaching Council.
# The Equality and Human Rights Commission.
# The Probation Service.
# Any penny anywhere that goes to ACPO.
An interesting list NNW but of course they are the tip of the iceberg where state funded 'charities' or quangos are concerned. Tinkering with the benefit system isn't enough, it needs overhauled from top to bottom.
In an independent Scotland I should like to think pensioners would get a reasonable state pension instead of having to apply for what many call 'handouts' in the credit system.
Child benefit should be paid as you say but housing should not be a priority for pregnant women. They should take their place in the queue. That may encourage a few more to consider their actions beforehand.
I don't think that ending babies on the rates with dole till she's fifty for Ma is tinkering - it goes straight to the heart of much welfare spending, 'deprivation,'crime, educational hell-holes called 'schools,' and yes, council housing shouldn't find them a place in the queue.
State pension or pension credits all do come from the same place, of course. If you get what you want, it'll be not my problem, but 'outwith' independence I'd abolish VAT [multiple win!] and instead oblige workers to pay 10% of their gross earnings into some kind of pension.
Ooops sorry NNW, I perhaps should have chosen my word more carefully. What I was meaning was that ALL the benefit system needs to be reviewed not one section. My apologies.
Everything comes from the same place NNW - the taxpayer.
I was going to bore you with an example of pensions but I want you to come back. :)
Your idea has been muted before but the sticking point seems to be the kind of pension. Our politicians can't agree on health pensions far less any other.
Strange really when other European countries pension systems appear to be successful without the need for so many to claim credits.
How very strange! In a country that claims to be be underpopulated and in need of more immigrants NNW wants to punish poor women for having babies. I notice also that banks and corporations are absent from your list of targets for cuts NNW. Why's that then?
There's no doubt in my mind that cuts are coming - how else to keep bankers living in luxury.
The bankers haven't changed one iota scunnert. They go on in their usual merry way.
scunnert said...
How very strange! In a country that claims to be be underpopulated...
[ I don't know who claims this - it's surely not me]
...and in need of more immigrants...
[again, what kind of fool thinks that that is the case?]
NNW wants to punish poor women for having babies.
[ I don't want to punish the taxpayers, teachers, children, police, and property-owners who are going to continue be hurt by the fast-breeding welfare mothers and their serial boyfriends who live as parasites on the rest of the population. Stop paying them to do it after three kids and ten years playing mother at the public expense.
There's a difference that most of us understand well here south of the border between punishing someone for something and refraining from rewarding them for doing something else.
Are you punishing me for blogging by not paying me for doing so, - forcing me to do it for free?
Dole mothers are an aristocracy; exempt from thrift, work and prudence - and everyone else has to work to feed their desire to be kept fertile and in idleness.]
- I notice also that banks and corporations are absent from your list of targets for cuts NNW.
[We own the banks now, thanks to Mister Brown's spending spree, 'light touch' regulation and his housing boom.
I'd not pay their management a penny of bonus until they've re-financed and are ready to be competitive life as re-privatised companies again. I'm not in charge - Labour' Gordon Brown is, and he's not consulting me. ]
Why's that then?
[ I missed mentioning the Highland Clearances as well, but this is about unemployment.
One way to reduce a thing is to stop paying for it. That includes financing these meat people carriers with tax cash.]
There's no doubt in my mind that cuts are coming - how else to keep bankers living in luxury.
[ They're public servants now, so I'd love to take their noses out of the trough.]
Post a Comment