George Osborne’s economic credibility has been called even further into question today – after searing criticism from the IFS accused the Chancellor of “misleading” people on the extent of cuts planned.

New IFS evidence today suggested that the Tory government will need to slash spending by 15 per cent on non-protected departments over the next three years – and described the UK Government’s previous claims about the scale of the cuts planned “give a misleading impression”.

The IFS criticism comes as the Tory Chancellor faces widespread condemnation for his announcement of further extreme budget cuts announced today – including £4.5bn in the current financial year leading to an additional cut of around £170m to the agreed Scottish budget.

Commenting, SNP MSP Kenneth Gibson said:

“The cuts agenda of George Osborne and the Tory government was already widely discredited and economically illiterate – and today the IFS have delivered a further blow to the Chancellor’s credibility, in addition to yesterday’s report from the OECD saying deep spending cuts are hampering economic growth.  Not content with delivering these cuts to public services, it now emerges that the Tories have been misleading people about the extreme scale of the cuts needed to meet their targets.

“Five years of Tory austerity has done too much damage already; working families and vulnerable people cannot afford even more cuts from the UK Government. At Holyrood and at Westminster, the SNP will continue to make the strong case for an alternative to austerity to ensure the most vulnerable people in our society do not continue to face the brunt of unfair Tory cuts.

“Whether George Osborne likes it or not, people in Scotland spoke loudly and decisively at the General Election – and gave the SNP an unprecedented mandate to pursue an end to Westminster’s ideological obsession with austerity cuts.

“The UK Government must now respect that mandate – and put a stop to the deep cuts to the Scottish budget which are hurting people in communities across the country.”


Notes to editors

The IFS comments are reported here: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/04/obsorne-misleading-cuts-needed-balance-books-ifs-spending-squeeze




The SNP is today highlighting further expert evidence on the ‘devastating’ impacts of sanctions on women – amidst further backing for powers over the sanctions regime to be in Scotland’s hands rather than Westminster’s.

Ahead of this week’s meeting of the Scottish Parliament’s Welfare Reform Committee, a series of expert submissions have underlined the appalling impact of sanctions on single mothers, survivors of domestic and sexual abuse, disabled women and refugees in particular.

Close the Gap, One Parent Families Scotland, the Fawcett Society, Inclusion Scotland, the Scottish Refugee Council, Child Poverty Action Group and the Scottish Women’s Convention all submitted written evidence highly critical of the UK Government’s social security cuts.

Many of the organisations provided case studies of those impacted by cuts – with One Parent Families telling the story of Emma, 20, who is receiving JSA, pregnant and suffering from severe morning sickness. When she tried to reschedule her work focused interview due to being incapacitated by morning sickness, she was sanctioned for four weeks.

The Scottish Women’s Convention also described how one woman, who was ten minutes late for an appointment due to having to take her four year old to the toilet, was also sanctioned for four weeks, and as a result was unable to feed her children.

The evidence also states that sanctions have led to some women being unable to afford to buy sanitary products.

This new evidence comes as other front-line organisations have made clear to the Committee their reservations with leaving the sanctions regime under the control of the UK Government – amidst growing calls for the full devolution of powers over social security to Scotland.

The SNP has previously backed calls from organisations such as Citizens Advice Scotland for a moratorium of the sanctions regime.

Commenting, Clare Adamson said:

“This is some absolutely heart-breaking evidence from front-line organisations on the appalling impact Westminster’s sanctioning regime is having on vulnerable women across Scotland – and shows exactly why we need these powers in Scotland’s hands.

“From single mothers to refugees, it’s clear that these sanctions are hurting the very people who need help the most – and the fact that organisations who see the impact of sanctions first hand in our communities are speaking out should make people sit up and take notice.

“The SNP has already been clear that there needs to be an immediate review of the UK Government’s conditionality and sanctions regime – and the DWP should not be allowed to impose any more unfair sanctions on vulnerable people while the review is ongoing.

“But more than that, we need the powers to put a stop to this relentless assault on vulnerable people – and to design a new and better system.

“Vulnerable women in Scotland can’t afford to continue to have these powers callously wielded by the likes of Iain Duncan Smith – we need full powers over social security in Scotland to allow us to protect, support and empower people who need help, rather than pushing them into poverty with punitive cuts and sanctions as the Tories are continuing to do.”

Case studies

One Parent Families Scotland via Fawcett Society evidence:

“Emma is 20 years old and two months pregnant. She has been out of work and so is claiming JSA. Emma has been suffering from severe morning sickness and as a result is incapacitated first thing in the morning. When she called her JSA Adviser to say she wouldn’t make her work focused interview and to ask for it to be rearranged she was told he was in a meeting but that the message would be passed on. The Adviser called a week later to ask why she hadn’t turned up, she then received a letter the next day to say she had been sanctioned, losing her JSA for 4 weeks.”

Child Poverty Action Group:

“A pregnant woman with two young children failed to complete mandatory work activity because she could not get access to a computer. Her sanction was applied on Wednesday but she was not informed that she could apply for a hardship payment until the Friday. She was told on the Friday that she would not be able to access the payment until the following Monday and had no money to get through the weekend.”

Scottish Women’s Convention:

“Sanctions have hit people hard and have left many with even lower self-esteem and confidence than they had previously. Women have been coming to the organisation I work with asking for sanitary products because they have been sanctioned and have no money.”

Scottish Women’s Convention:

“One woman recently supported by our Fife service was 10 minutes late for an appointment due to an unforeseen event with one of her children (a four year old needing the toilet on the way to an appointment), she was sanctioned. The impact of this sanctioning for her wellbeing and the wellbeing of her family was devastating.

“She was without money for 4 weeks and as a result she was unable to purchase fuel cards for her gas and electricity meters or feed her children. A number of other household bills went unpaid and she had to borrow money from friends and relatives in order to survive.”

The impact of sanctions on lone parents

Close the Gap:

““Current provision of childcare is entirely insufficient to meet the needs of all women who are categorised as ‘economically inactive’.  This means that not all women will be able to meet the needs of the programme, and will therefore be subject to sanction.”

“Lone parents, 91 per cent of whom are women, are particularly impacted by the policy of increased conditionality and sanctions.”

Inclusion Scotland:

“Very recently published research carried out in a deprived  area of Scotland puts out that ‘they key welfare changes impacting adversely on lone parents were the activation and sanction policies applied when out of work and earlier re-categorisation from carer to employee when seeking work’.  Sanctions for lone parents on JSA have risen from under 200 per month prior to 2008 to 4700 per month now.”

One Parent Families Scotland:

“There is now a large amount of evidence which shows that sanctions are often applied in an arbitrary and unfair way, plunging families into severe poverty, with devastating effects on people’s health and wellbeing.  These findings chime with our own experience, working with single mothers who are sanctioned or threatened with sanctions through no fault of their own.

“In addition, the rise of a stigmatizing, disrespectful and even aggressive culture at Job Centres and Work Programme placements is a critical issue for single mothers and is a major cause of rising stress.  This is borne out by research into the experiences of single parents in Glasgow which found that most (though not all) single parents experiences of services provided by JobCentre Plus were very negative indeed.”

The impact of sanctions on victims of domestic and sexual violence

The Fawcett Society:

“Due to the framework of benefits conditionality inherent to JSA and which has been tightened by the recent reforms, survivors of domestic and sexual violence, who are predominantly women, are therefore more likely to lose access to the benefits they are entitled to because of normal responses to circumstances outside of their control.”

The impact of sanctions on disabled women

Inclusion Scotland:

“Disabled women feel that benefit staff have more recently become increasingly unhelpful and arbitrary in their decisions and also much more punitive.  Indeed, many disabled women are now fearful of dealing with DWP staff because of the fear of sanctions or having their entitlement to DLA or ESA taken away.”

“Due to benefit cuts, long delays in assessing claims, punitive sanctions and lengthy mandatory reconsiderations, disabled women are experiencing increasingly long periods with inadequate or no means of financial support.  As a consequence some disabled women are being forced to turn to prostitution as a source of income.  This is even more likely where these women have caring responsibilities and no means to feed their children.”

The impact of sanctions on refugees

Scottish Refugee Council:

“Where our clients are sanctioned, this most often occurs within the first six months of being granted leave to remain.  This would suggest that people who are grappling with an unfamiliar and complex system are being penalised for their lack of awareness of the system rather than supported effectively to engage with it and start to rebuild lives.”

On devolution

The Fawcett Society submission calls for the Scottish Government to have “the power to redefine the scope, applicability and severity of sanctions.”

One Parent Familes Scotland:

“Under current proposals, the Work Programme, but not the JobCentre Plus is to be devolved.  As they stand, the draft clauses set out in the UK Government’s Command Paper appear to devolve the Work Programme to the Scottish Government whilst maintaining the current sanctioning regime which underpins both referrals to, and the policing of, the Work Programme by the DWP. It is difficult to see how such  arrangements can be described as the devolution in any meaningful way.”

“Given that the final shape of devolution is not yet settled, we would urge The Scottish Government to seize every opportunity to press for full devolution of the Work Programme so that we can develop an alternative which will support and empower single mothers in Scotland.”

Scottish Women’s Convention:

“As sanctions and conditionality are to remain reserved, serious tensions could arise between policies put in place by the Scottish Government with regards to the Work Programme, and the sanctions that can be imposed by the Jobcentre Plus, a UK-level institution.”

“It seems somewhat at odds that on one hand, the Scottish Government can create a Work Programme which best suits the needs of Scottish people, yet on the other hand, the sanctions associated with that remain at Westminster.  Those seeking work could be at a detriment as a result.”




The SNP is today highlighting a leaked UK Government Department of Work and Pensions document confirming that the Tory plan to lower the household benefit cap could put a further 40,000 children on or below the poverty line.

The leaked document – reported in today’s Guardian – states that if parents are unable to find extra work “Around 40,000 more…children might, in the absence of any behaviour change, find themselves in poverty as a result of reducing the cap to £23,000.”

Commenting, SNP MSP Kevin Stewart said:

“The damning figures in this leaked document show the appalling impact of the Tory government’s relentless assault on the poor – and demonstrate precisely why we need to take urgent action to ensure the Tories’ punitive, indefensible policies aren’t allowed to continue to push more of our children into poverty.

“Behind the scenes, Iain Duncan Smith is clearly well aware that his new policy could push 40,000 more children into poverty – and yet callously seeks to press ahead with his unfair plans.

“Westminster’s attitude to the savage welfare cuts that are inflicting such hardship on so many people underlines why they can’t be allowed to take decisions on social security on Scotland’s behalf any more. The Scottish Parliament needs full powers on social security to allow us to support and empower people – rather than pushing more people into poverty like the Tories are continuing to do.”

Further details can be found here: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/29/household-benefit-cap-plunge-40000-kids-poverty-memo




America – astronomical cost in health care is showing here for everybody to consider.

It shows what the U.K. is in for with contracts dealing with TTIP – can anybody afford these prices? I don’t think so!
These bills show a young person aged twenty starting off in life finding themselves needing Hospital treatment in the U.S.A.

The message is crystal clear, do not get sick in the U.S.A. – a country the size of U.K. do not need TTIP here, especially while the U.K. is spending four (4) times more than other European countries buying bombs and bullets – surely peoples health and well-being must come first in a civilised and modern society.

If twenty year olds in America are getting Hospital bills like this it must be awful for those who do not have or cannot afford health insurance, what safety net is in place for road accidents, shootings, violent crime etc…are the poor in American society contracted in debt for life to health insurance companies if they ever need health care?

Please check out these bills sent to a twenty year old who had no choice but request health care and according to his comments he was insured?

If TTIP are able to come into the U.K. either by the front door or in stealth, we are all in trouble!

Bill part1

Bill part1

Bill part2

Bill part2

Bill part3

Bill part3

Bill part4

Bill part4





Speaking in advance of the UK Government’s Queen’s Speech, Scottish National Party Westminster Group leader Angus Robertson MP said that the SNP offered a sustained and effective opposition to the Tory government – compared to a leaderless Labour Party which is debating moving further onto Tory policy ground. Mr Robertson said:

On a range of issues – such as gaining a Commons debate on the whistleblower report about the security of Trident nuclear weapons, to demanding urgent action on the Mediterranean refugee crisis – the SNP group of 56 are already a strong and effective opposition to the Tory government.

That will be demonstrated further in our response to the UK government’s Queen’s Speech.

“Our priority is ending austerity, and the damage it does to people’s lives.

The Tory government’s priority is ending human rights, and we will work across party lines and with colleagues in the Scottish Parliament to stop them scrapping the Human Rights Act.

To a large extent, the Labour Party leadership debate at Westminster is focussing on Labour moving yet further onto Tory policy ground. During the election, it was the SNP – not Labour – which proposed a real alternative to austerity, and we received the mandate of 56 out of Scotland’s 59 constituencies.

Opposing austerity will be at the heart of our response to the Tories’ programme for government.

And since the election, we have seen Labour u-turn to back the Tories on a European referendum – and support their ridiculous and discriminatory position of allowing some but not all EU nationals to vote.

“In terms of more powers for Scotland, it is an early test of the UK Government’s good faith that the Scotland Bill lives up to both the spirit and the letter of the Smith Commission.

The Scottish Government has already set out the shortcomings of the draft legislation published in January, and submitted detailed amendments to the UK Government to bring their original proposals into line with Smith, so there can be no excuse.

“This is the first key test. And as the First Minister agreed with David Cameron, the Scottish Government will also put forward proposals for a transfer of powers beyond Smith for discussion between the Scottish Secretary and the Deputy First Minister – for which half of Scotland’s electorate voted.

The people of Scotland have spoken, and Westminster has a democratic duty to listen. “In these and many more important areas, the real opposition to the Tories at Westminster is coming – and will continue to come – from the SNP.”

Migrants Not Allowed To Vote On EU

Migrants Not Allowed To Vote On EU.



Migrants Not Allowed To Vote On EU membership but Migrants was allowed to keep Scotland British is this fair?



So its OK for the English to come to Scotland for work and stay here and vote whether we stay in a Union that does not work and thats OK because it served the purpose of the union when everyone knows it should have only been Scottish born who had the vote.



So the different migrants coming into the UK might swing in favour of a no vote because lets face it if they vote to leave the union its bye bye them back to where-ever they came from, nothing like the Government stacking the deck the same they done in the Scottish indy vote.



If the Migrants are from EU states what is the difference with them voting on EU membership and other non-Scottish voters voting in the indy vote last year, double Westminster standards yet again!



When the next vote comes along Westminster would be crazy to try and block all Scottish born to vote on their countries future and us alone, if its good enough for an EU in out then so be it for the people of Scotland.




The following video is part of the secret videos released to BBC Alba viewers, yet strangely enough it was never shown in BBC Scotland.


The video itself throws into complete disarray recent MPs comments leading up to the last vote on the 7th of May 2015 and also the Independence vote last Sept the 18th 2014.


The video also shows the lengths the government and their puppets will go to, to keep everything as “Status Quo”


The video proves how much the voice that Scots really have in the affairs of running their own Country…at present it is legalised robbery!


Hopefully the SNP MPs will strengthen the voice of Scotland


Scots subsidised the U.K. to the tune of £27 billion

Scots subsidised the U.K. to the tune of £27 billion.

Scots subsidised the U.K. to the tune of £27 billion.

Scots subsidised the U.K. to the tune of £27 billion…read more!

Credit to; – Allan Patterson

JOHN JAPPY is a retired civil servant from Head Office in London, Accounting Division – linked to the Treasury


Scotland’s demand for “Full Fiscal Autonomy”

Friday, 1 May 2015

During the Referendum campaign various promises were made by the Unionists to keep us from voting for Independence; in the case of Gordon Brown a late intervention of a guaranteed promise of “Full Fiscal Autonomy” (FFA) if we voted to stay in the Union; which in simple terms means to give Scots the ability to keep, and spend as we wish, all taxes raised in Scotland.


But now we are seeing the same desperate scare stories that we saw in the later stages of the Independence Referendum campaign to prevent us achieving this. Why should this be so? The Unionists know that achieving FFA at Holyrood will result in huge benefits for Scotland – leading to an unstoppable surge for full Independence.


Before each Westminster Election, the Party in opposition always says the same thing, namely “once we get our hands on the books we will be able to tell you what we will do”.


This of course to a large extent is true and we can only consider pre-election promises of major changes in policy as “speculative”. Politicians are not accountants and can often ignore sound advice given to them by Civil Servants, and at the highest level can often panic when things don’t work out as expected. One incident comes to mind which shows how easily this can happen.



Whilst a Civil Servant and working on taxation figures for the National Budget, I received a phone call from a very anxious Chancellor of the Exchequer, who enquired why the Tax Revenues collected to date were only 50% of the expected figure of 60%. It gave me much pleasure to tell him that due to a Scottish bank holiday the figure of revenues from the Scottish Whisky Industry had failed to arrive in time to be included in the current total. The next week the figure shot up to 72%.


Whilst times have greatly changed and payments from most large companies go directly to London, (which will cause some disentangling problems when we get Full Fiscal Autonomy) but the bottom line is always the same: Only by getting full control of both tax raising and spending powers will Scotland thrive. The unionist media are scared stiff of this happening and, as they do know the position of Scotland’s hidden wealth, we will see an even wider fear campaign leading up to the 7th May.


Some facts that emerged prior to the Referendum are worth recalling.


Firstly. Scottish taxpayers have for the last 33 years paid more tax per head of population than their counterparts south of the Border.


Secondly. The “Financial Times”, a newspaper which values its international reputation for honesty and integrity above any political expediency, published in detail on 2 February 2014 how much better off Scotland would be from Day 1 of gaining Independence (my article was printed in the Scots Independent of February 2014 and can also be viewed on my blog athttp://scotlandowntwofeet.blogspot.co.uk).


Most senior Westminster politicians that I encountered during my career had scant knowledge of how the financial system works. One of the best current examples is Danny Alexander, whom in a letter I sent to all Highland local newspapers he was described by me as “a mere puppet, reading from a script given to him, whilst his Tory masters pulled the strings” (only the Danny loving “Inverness Courier” failed to publish).


Now we are back to pre-referendum scare mongering in a last ditch effort by the pals Labour and the Tories to prevent the SNP from sweeping the boards on May 7th and lead the way to fiscal autonomy with our powerful presence in Westminster.


Let us take one example of their false manipulations. The fall in oil prices has been seized upon with glee to claim that this would bankrupt an Independent Scotland. Nothing could be further from the truth. From the start of the “Oil Boom”, some £250 billion of Scottish Tax Revenues have gone directly to the London Exchequer and added directly to the Consolidated Fund (containing taxes raised from all other sources), resulting in only a minor addition to the funding given to Scotland through the Barnett Formula. However, with either Independence or full financial control through “Full Fiscal Autonomy”, every penny would belong to Scotland. Even if the financial yield were to fall by 50%, it would result in a vast improvement to finances to what is currently provided through the Barnett Formula. This is just an example why the Unionists will not give Scotland full fiscal control.

Where are you hiding Gordon Brown?

* http://fullfiscalautonomy.blogspot.co.uk/

* https://twitter.com/JohnJappy/status/594475045851889664

Scotland, England, Ireland, Wales going to get stripped bare – positive!

Scotland, England, Ireland, Wales going to get stripped bare – positive!



Scary stuff readers but it’s about to happen – the section reference Queensland is especially uncomfortable to hear about, we are next!



Just when you thought things could not get any worse the water we drink is in grave danger of being poisoned…this of course will have dangerous effects on our foodstuffs!



Perhaps you like the idea of pipes running all over the place like a spiders web covering the surface of the planet – I don’t !



Will you stand by and watch the destruction of our planet? Will you stand by and tolerate what is happening in the future of our children and Grandchildren? – we are responsible, not our offspring!


Watch this video and think for yourself, 1, what is happening to our country? 2, Why is this being continued without public consultation? 3, Is money their first priority? 4, Have we got the right government looking after our interests? 5, Is the Scottish Government doing enough for Scotland?

Do these people who are responsible for this idiotic industry think we in Scotland are stupid?






THE SNP has surprisingly won its first election in England – at a primary school in Norfolk.

Pupils in Year 5 at Peterhouse Primary Academy in Gorleston took part in a mock general election last week, with pupils put forward as party members and candidates campaigning for votes.

Along with campaign posters, six students representing the leaders of the six main parties, took to the stage during assemblies and delivered speeches based on actual education policies.

The Tories were represented by Danny Docwra, aged 9; 10-year-old Charlie Jordan campaigned for Labour; Riley Coe, 10, took on the role as Liberal Democrat candidate; Travis Trussler, also 10, stood for Ukip while Connor Dutton and Emily Stonehouse, both aged 10, represented the Greens and the SNP respectively.

 The pupils were instructed to research each party’s policy on education, and deliver them to the school before a secret ballot was held.

After the votes were counted up, the SNP candidate Emily Stonehouse was declared the winner.

Emily told the Great Yarmouth Mercury that she was ‘overjoyed’ at her victory.

When asked what she thought helped her to success, she added: “The policies, which included free nursery places for three and four-year-olds.”

Her deputy, Keegan King, said: “They had a lot of support in the other years within the school, including Emily’s brother and sister who were behind her all the way.”

The SNP’s ‘victory’ comes just days after it was revealed that Nicola Sturgeon was the ‘most Googled’ party leader in some English constituencies including Sefton Central, Maidenhead, Leicestershire South, Louth & Horncastle and City of Chester.

Story from the Scotsman.com

« Older Entries Recent Entries »