Gunwalloe - Church Cove
View across Church Cove in Gunwalloe at the base of the Lizard Peninsula.
The church is St Winwalloe with it's distinctively seperate bell tower and surrounding Tamarisk hedge....
newlyn house
Wonderfully painted frontage....
rogers tower
A folly built 18th C, for Mr Rogers, a local landowner....
Abednego, Scotland has always and understandably, voiced anti-English sentiments. It's partial, non-personal, historical and my personal experience is that it no greater or lesser since devolution. A lot would be of the ill feeling would have economic origins. However, the SNP have always had visions beyond devolution. As for our Norman, well Ovid's thoughts were mythology, but after his showing especially in 1992, the response of his Surrey constituency and his showing in Yorkshire politics - I wouldn't take any notice of what Norman says.
"Non-personal" anti-English racism, now there's an intriguing notion. Understandable too, apparently.
As for economic causes for any anti-English racism, well, look at the reality of the redistribution of British taxes and the subsequent annual public spending per head of population (the latest figures I have):
Scotland £5 558, England £4 529. And Wales £5 302.
Hmm, it's getting more understandable by the minute.
As for Lamont, what does it matter what people think of him, the only question is, Is he right?
I don't think facts, like the public spending figures, ever enter into peoples "racist" thoughts; gut feelings being more important. The perception of many Scots are/were that the government of the UK ploughed bags of money into SE England and very little into the Central Valley or beyond. In my experience, these thoughts were most intense during the Thatcher years, of which Lamont was an integral part. Also on the economic front, there's "Scotlands" oil, which has always been a bone of contention with south of the border.
As for Norman's thoughts and experiences, he never really seemed to have his feet firmly on the ground, especially when he walked around London with the suspected bomb in his hands, so I cannot take his comments seriously. Also, there is very likely to be some political loading to his words.
I don’t know one way or the other but I take it you have the figures to back up this assertion.
I suppose public investment (apart from defence and schools) began in Britain around the time of World War I so it should not be too difficult for you to verify your assertion. I’d like to know what the figures are and where they come from.
What I do know is that the Barnett Formula has been going since 1978. Scotland's population is about five million. A Formula 'excess' of British-taxpayer-funded public spending at £1000 per head per year for Scotland over twenty seven in presentday terms amounts to, wow, there's not enough room on the page to write it.
Abednego's argument is a fatuous argument. The Barnett formula only applies to Government funding in regard of local services and devolved administration. it is inevitable that both Wales and Scotland will receive more more as they are not administered from London. Across the UK we all pay the same taxes, we all put into the central pot. Government then returns some of that money back to local communities. In Wales and Scotland they get more money back because they have a devolved administration. In contrast, other areas of the UK still pay into the central pot and get less back where is the excess spent - on bureacracy in London. Every other part of the UK substantially subsidises London. London is by far the richest region in Europe according to latest Eurostat figures. For example London is over three times more wealthy than Cornwall. Part of the reason for this is our over centralised state. The fact that these pittances are returned to Wales and Scotland which still produce more tax revenue than is returned to them is irrelevant. You should be asking why schoolchildren in London have more money allocated to them that schoolchildren in Cornwall? Or why water bills in Cornwall are twice the amount that Tony Blair pays for in his London home? Cornwall is not alone in these problems. Devolution is not the problem - centralisation is.
What might be more relevant is trying to work out the impact of tax take, land possession and cultural genocide that has occurred historically in celtic lands, before you suggest that the celts owe this state anything. The Barnett formula doesn't even begin to address the balance.
Wrong. That’s a misunderstanding of what happens and why. They get more public spending per head per year because the Barnett Formula (which began in 1978 long before semi-independence) is specifically designed to give them more. That’s what the Formula is for and it has delivered more per head to Scotland and Wales (and Northern Ireland in spades) each year since 1978. That’s since before devolution. Before devolution.
Scotland and Wales also have centralised governments which administer public spending there as the UK government does for England.
Wrong. Estimates of London’s “tax export� put it at £11 billion - 15 billion a year. That is, London pays that amount more in taxes than it gets in public spending. London is subsidising the rest of Britain.
I realise London and the southeast are the bogeymen of nationalists to be brought out to frighten the children, and some parts are rich as are some parts of Cornwall, but three of the five most deprived council areas in England are in London. I lived and worked in one and believe me that’s serious, longterm deprivation we’re talking about - and yet London has a very large tax export.
London's GDP is £162 billion out of a total UK total GDP of £953 billion (2002 figures). So it can hardly be said that London is preventing the rest of the UK from "living in mud huts". As the UK's finanaces are all channeled through London and the economy is controlled from there, most of the country have no say in how their money is spent and are deprived of investment. The Government automatically favours London over other cities when it comes to big national events such as the Olympics, the rest of the country is treated as if it didn't exist and such bodies as the Arts Council are loath to spend any money beyond London.
If London generates £22.6 billion a year more than is put into it and its GDP is £162 billion, then it must have around £140 billion a year of UK taxpayer’s money invested in it per annum. The equivalent amount of investment for Greater Manchester to scale would be £50 billion a year and the equivalent profit would be £8 billion. Considering that Manchester has a GDP of £33.8 billion a year, it either has far less than £50 billion invested in it or it makes a loss of over £16 billion. As the economy of Greater Manchester is the second strongest outside of London and the regional economy is booming, the former statement must be true. Also London is the UK’s gateway to the global economy, the UK’s only centre of international finance and the centre of its tourist industry. As well as this, 75% of all international arrivals enter the UK through London.
Abednego mistakes political devolution for administrative devolution. Political devolution was achieved in 1997. Whereas administrative devolution the establishment of the Scottish Office and Welsh office occurred prior to the establishment of the Barnett formula in the 1970s. As more functions of government were devolved to these institutions a changed funding formula was created - the Barnett formula.
Remember William Hague Tory minister of Wales, having welsh lessons from Ffion whilst being MP for Yorkshire!
You cannot compare apples with pears, if England or Cornwall had greater devolution then there would need to be an adjustment of centralised funding to deal with the administration that was taking place locally and not in London.
The tax take in London and the south east is inevitably going to be higher as more larger earners exist in London and over a tenth of the UK population live there.
Fulub makes some good points about how additional wealth is generated in London and I take your point about there being poverty aswell. However what we are discussing is how money is distributed from the central pot. What I am saying is that it is not fair that the majority of that central money is spent in London on centralised administration. Whichever way you look at that is a subsidy for a London economy which doesn't need it.
Is centralisation necesserally good for London or for the rest of the UK? Centralisation may mean more high paid jobs in London (less everwhere else), but also more congestion & more environmental problems. Whereas the regions lack any economic oomph to even vaguely compare with this global city. Other European countries have a much more balanced economy. In the UK we should be striving to decentralise and bring economic and political decision making closer to the people.
Anybody who lives in Cornwall knows how crazy the centralisation of Health services at Treliske is. Cornwall has the population to justify 3 or 4 decent hospitals but everyone has to go to Treliske or even worse Derriford. Just because some people view bigger as better.
Interesting piece from this week's Living Cornwall...
We in cornwall want to make our decisions, express our
identity and respect the need between ourselves and England
without need to turn to confrontation.
Review urged over toll rise plans
Councillors in Cornwall want plans for a 50% increase in toll charges to cross the River Tamar to be reviewed.
Safety DVD helps migrant workers
A safety DVD aimed at helping migrant workers in Cornwall settle into life in the county is released.
Sex case teacher 'compassionate'
A former outdoor pursuits instructor accused of abusing children tells a court he dealt with pupils compassionately.
Crews in tumble dryer fire rescue
One person is rescued from a four-storey building in Cornwall after a fire broke out because of a tumble dryer.
MK CALL ON SW RDA TO SUPPORT SOUTH CROFTY PLAN
Members of the Camborne and Redruth constituency party of Mebyon Kernow have called on both the South West Regional Development Agency (RDA) and the Urban Regeneration Company (URC) for the area to drop any opposition to the current re-opening of South Crofty Mine. The MK members want statements issued in support of the mine.
REJECTION OF PRISON TRANSFER REQUEST MEAN-SPIRITED
Following a specious and mean-spirited decision an Irish prisoner in England has had his request for a transfer to a prison in Ireland been rejected once again, for the fifth time.
BREIZH: LEAGUE GS MEETS UN CLIMSAT DIRECTOR
The Director of the new United Nations CLIMSAT centre in Brest, Breizh (Brittany) said on the weekend that the future of the Breton environment lay in the autonomy of Brittany.
